The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Report - June 15, 2011 C-16 PHAGENDA ITEM Co 410 isCITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION TM AGENDA TITLE: Set Public Hearing for July 20, 2011 to Consider Resolution Approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Reportand Certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as Adequate Environmental Documentationfor Harney Lane Specific Plan MEETING DATE: June 15,2011 PREPARED B Y Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set public hearing for July 20, 2011 to consider resolution approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Reportand certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2010 General Plan designates Harney Lane as a four -lane expressway between Lower Sacramento Road and State Route 99. West of Lower Sacramento Road to the city limits, Harney Lane is generally designated to be a four -lane expressway. The Specific Plan covers the area from the city limits on the west to South Stockton Street on the east, as presented in ExhibitA. The section of Harney Lane between South Stockton Street and State Route 99 is not included in the Specific Plan because the roadwaywidening is currently occurring as part of development in the area. The Harney Lane Specific Plan is a planning tool that will be used to guide the systematic implementation of the adopted General Plan. It effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan, individual development proposals, and future City capital improvement projects along the Harney Lane corridor. A copy of the Harney Lane Specific Plan Reportand Technical Appendices are available at the Public Works Departmentfor review, and an abridged copy of the report is provided in Exhibit B. The Harney Lane Specific Planwill accomplishtwo objectives. The first is, to identifythe roadway improvements to be constructed along Harney Lane, the second, to establish the required right-of-way to serve anticipated growth and future traffic volume increases along the corridor. The proposed geometrics reflect the ultimate improvements required to serve the traffic expected to result from development of the General Plan. It is anticipated that a phased-constructionapproach will be utilized to construct the ultimate improvements. Therefore, interim geometric plans will likely be implemented to deal with constraints represented by cost, relocation of structures, right-of-way acquisition, and accident history. As development occurs along the corridor, ultimate improvements will be required in conjunction with that development project. An importantaspect of the design of expressways is the limitation on the number of intersections and other turning movements onto and from the expressway. This Specific Plan assumes that intersections with median openings will be allowed only at Westgate Drive (a future intersection), Lower Sacramento Road, South Mills Avenue, South Ham Lane, South Hutchins Street, and South Stockton Street. Further discussion of the geometric design and phased improvement of Harney Lane is provided below. APPROVED: Konra artlam, City Manager K:\WP\PROJECTS\STREETS\HameyLaneSpecificPlan\CSetPHSpecPlan_NegDec.doc 6/7/201 Set Public Hearing for July 20, 2011 to Consider Resolution Approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and Certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as Adequate Environmental Documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan June 15,2011 Page 2 The corridor is divided into four distinct segments for discussion purposes — Segment 1: City limits to Lower Sacramento Road; Segment 2: Lower Sacramento Road to Mills Avenue; Segment 3: South Mills Avenue to South Hutchins Street; and Segment 4: South Hutchins Street to South Stockton Street. This segmentation is not intended to reflect the phasing of improvements or the sequencing. Segment 1— City Limits to Lower Sacramento Road Harney Lane west of Lower Sacramento Road lies primarilywithin San Joaquin County and partly within the City. The County portion of this road segment is anticipated to eventually be annexed into the City. The north side of Harney Lane in this area is within the City's sphere of influence. The south side is not within the City's sphere of influence and is expected to remain in the County. The houses on the north side are set back a minimum of 27 feet from the existing right-of-way, while the houses on the south range from 2 to 25 feet back from the existing right-of-way. Because of this condition, two improvement alternatives were developed for this segment. The first is an interim alternative that is not expected to be needed until the Southwest Gateway project develops, which could be 10 to 15 years in the future. Since the houses on the south are closest to the road, the existing south right-of-way line was held, wherever possible, and the improvements were pushed to the north side. To constructthe interim improvements, 9'h feet of right-of-way would be required on the north side of the street. On the south, the two properties closest to Lower Sacramento Road would be affected. The amount of right-of-way required at these locations varies from 0 to 3 feet. By taking this approach, no housing structures will be impacted. The ultimate improvement alternative for Segment 1 would closely conform to the City standard section for a secondary arterial which measures 64 feet from curb to curb. The improvementswould need to be installed when traffic from additional development determines that it is necessary. The houses on the north are still set back far enough that the extra right-of-waywill not impact the houses directly but would reduce the size of the front yards by 10 feet. On the south side, 10 properties are affected. Three propertieswould need to be purchased to build the improvements. Segment 2 - Lower Sacramento Road to South Mills Avenue Similar to Segment 1, Harney Lane between Lower Sacramento Road and South Mills Avenue is expected to be widened in phases. Interim improvementswill be implemented when the City deems traffic volumes or accident levels have created unsafe conditions. The south side of the roadway consists of rural residential homes built on fairly large lots. The homes are generally set well back from the existing roadway. The interim improvementswill widen Harney Lane to allow the traffic to flow safely but reduce impact to residences on the south side. The ultimate improvements are not expected to be required until the properties on the south side of Harney Lane and easterly of this segment are developed. Segment 3 — South Mills Avenue to South Hutchins Street Because there are only three property owners on the south side of Harney Lane, and these properties are likely to develop in the future, the City potentiallywill only be involved in the construction of the interim alternative if traffic demands increase and safety becomes a concern. The ultimate alternative will likely be constructed in conjunctionwith development. The residential homes east of the Woodbridge Irrigation Canal on the north side have driveway access onto Harney Lane. This access will continue to be provided for and complemented with on -street parking and a bicycle lane. In this area, a total of 14 feet is provided on the north side of the roadway to accommodate the parking and bicycle lane. K:\WP\PROJECTS\STREETS\HarneyLaneSpeciflcPlan\CSetPHSpecPlan_NegDec.doc 6/7/2011 Set Public Hearing for July 20, 2011 to Consider Resolution Approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and Certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as Adequate Environmental Documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan June 15,2011 Page 3 Segment 4 - South Hutchins Street to South Stockton Street This segment is unique to the others due to the Union Pacific Railroad crossing that exists in the middle of the segment, as well as special considerations required to support the existing agricultural/industrial uses at the southeast quadrant of the Harney Lane and South Hutchins Street intersection. The City has plans for a grade separation at the railroad crossing as presented in the Harney Lane/Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Feasibility Study (Mark Thomas and Company, 2010). The Grade Separation Feasibility Study will be presented to the Council at a later date to discuss alternative grade separation designs and the environmental impacts associated with each alternative. The Harney Lane and South Hutchins Street intersection is expected to be constructed in two phases. Agricultural operations at the two large properties, Costa and Tsutsumi, on the south side of Harney Lane will be impacted by construction of the interim and ultimate improvements along this segment of the Harney Lane corridor. The Tsutsumi property operates a vineyard located between the Union Pacific Railroad and South Stockton Street. The Tsutsumi propertywill only be affected when the grade separation widens Harney Lane to Stockton Street. At that time the Tsutsumi propertywill have its driveways widened to accommodate westbound entry of harvesting equipment turning into the property. The Costa property is located between South Hutchins Street and the Union Pacific Railroad. Each phase provides the necessary improvementsto Harney Lane while limiting the impacts to the Costa agricultural operations. The first phase is an interim alternative. The second phase is the ultimate widening of Harney Lane along the Costa property. The first phase widens the South Hutchins Street intersection to accommodatethe proposed medical center at the southwest corner of the intersection. The first phase includes widening Harney Lane along a portion of the Costa property. The median along the Costa property would be striped to allow left turns into their driveway on Harney Lane. The improvementswill include the creation of an eastbound pull-out lane to facilitate trucks turning into and out of a new driveway into the Costa's property. This work will require the removal of cherry trees within the existing right-of-wayand within the orchard to allow for construction of the new driveway. The second phase is the construction of a grade separation at the Union Pacific Railroad. The grade separation will be a City -sponsored project and will be constructed as soon as funding is available. With this phase, the Costa's will lose full access to both driveways on Harney Lane by virtue of the raised median that will be constructedwith the grade separation. City staff met with the Costas in three one-on-one meetings to discuss the impacts the Harney Lane Specific Plan would have on their operations and access to their property. The Costas expressed concerns about the effects the widening of Harney Lane would have on the access to and operations of their business. The Specific Plan addresses the concerns expressed by the Costas. Public Outreach Two public meetings were held at Henderson Community Day School. The first public meeting was held on June 8, 2010, to present the preliminary Specific Plan, explain the purpose of a specific plan, request input on the plan and to give the attendees an opportunityto individually meetwith City staff. A total of 52 people attended the meeting. A second public meeting was held on January 25, 2011, to present residents with an update addressing the comments from the first public meeting, the follow up individual meetings and staff modifications to the Specific Plan. A total of 53 people attended the second meeting. As part of the public outreach, the City staff invited all residentswithin the project area to meet one-on-one with the projectteam to further explain the Specific Plan and to discuss the impactto their K:\W P\PROJECTS\STREETS\HarneyLaneSpeciflcPlan\CSetPHSpecPlan_NegDec.doc 6/7/2011 Set Public Hearing for July 20, 201 Ito Consider Resolution Approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and Certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as Adequate Environmental Documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan June 15,2011 Page 4 individual properties. Since not all of the citizens could attend the public meetings, two separate letters went out to all property owners whose properties would be impacted. A total of 55 residents took the opportunity to meet with the project team. The meetings were either held at the property owner's residence or at the Public Works office. The meetings were successful in providing information to the property owners and in resolving most of the property owners' concerns and issues. Harney Lane Specific Plan Nenative Declaration In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, the City, as the lead agency, prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit C) and published a Notice of Availability (NOA) announcing that the Harney Lane Specific Plan Draft Negative Declaration had been prepared and was available to the public for review. The NOA was submitted to the State Clearinghouse, distributed to local agencies, sent to interested persons, posted with the County Clerk's office, mailed to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the project boundary, posted on the City's website and published in the Lodi News Sentinel. The 30 -day window for review and comment on the draft Negative Declaration commenced on Tuesday, April 12,2011, and concluded on Wednesday, May 11, 2011. During the public review period, five comments were received on the proposed Negative Declaration [State Clearing House, California Valley Miwok Tribe, State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 10, San Joaquin County Council of Governments (SJCOG), and Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR)]. The letterfrom the State Clearinghouse notes that the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declarationwere circulatedfor a 30 -day period review and that only Caltrans District 10 submitted a comment letter. It further notes that the review requirements for draft environmental documents have been fulfilled. The letter from California Valley Miwok Tribe notes change of their mailing address. Their comment is noted and City staff has updated their mailing address. The Caltrans letter indicates that a traffic impact study is required for this project in order to determine the proposed project's near-term and long-term impacts to State facilities. The City feels this issue has already been addressed via a previous Mitigated Negative Declaration (Harney Lane Interim improvements ProjectSCH#2010072040) and the General Plan EIR 2010 (SCH#2009022075). The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral component of the City's General Plan 2010, which identifies Harney Lane as a four -lane expressway. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the plan area, including all subdivisions, site plan reviews, planned development review, and conditional use permits will be subject to environmental review on a project-by-projectbasis. SJCOG notes the project limits are within a habitat zone and future developments would be subject to requirements in effect at the time the developments occur. Finally, the UPRR letter notes that a future grade separation at the Harney Lane railroad is needed. The City notes that planning for the grade separation has commenced and it anticipates completing the design and environmental review of the project at some time in the future. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable. F. Wally S delin Public Works Director Prepared by Chris Boyer, Junior Engineer FWS/CB/pmf Attachments cc: Affected Property Owners K:\WP\PROJECTS\STREETS\HarneyLaneSpecificPlan\CSetPHSpecPlan_NegDec.doc 6/7/2011 M070 Dd11 bidge poor C4urvIry own 4 —WL6r,%Rd—! I'Vi6adbH dil 7'i. Exhibit A VUoo*Mdga Rd F--- 12 1.0 At—= T 2c ]-nj k.-- • m kmaIL All J W. ILD n, KM T_ L4 T p M.D." pow E -Hutmy Ln , ---Armist� FW Lod Ai"rk . 14, I.1 I lady ke er'. .=.-,.W_Tumer-,Fo--- 1711 ---W-Eifn h pof I.— -U; I L T-... - rw 1 1- TT rn Exhibit A VUoo*Mdga Rd F--- 12 1.0 At—= T 2c ]-nj k.-- • m kmaIL All J W. ILD n, KM T_ L4 T p M.D." pow E -Hutmy Ln , ---Armist� FW Lod Ai"rk . 14, Exhibit B HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN Prepared for the City of Lodi Department of Public Works 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 May 11,2011 Prepared by Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. 7300 Folsom Blvd., Ste 203 Sacramento, CA 95826 Ot Harney Lane Specific Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY May I I, 2011 The Specific Plan has two purposes. One purpose is to complete a public outreach program attempting to reach a consensus regarding the appropriate roadway improvements to be constructed along the Harney Lane corridor. The other purpose is to establish the required right of way to serve anticipated growth and future traffic voluine increases along the corridor. The Specific Plan was prepared in accordance with the City fi-amework set out in the General Plan adopted April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. The General Plan designates Harney Lane as a four lane expressway between Lower Sacramento Road and State Route 99. West of Lower Sacramento Road to the city limits, Harney Lane is designated to be a four lane minor arterial. The Specific Plan covers the area from the city limits on the west to South Stockton Street on the east. The section of Harney Lane between South Stockton Street and State Route 99 is not included in the Specific Plan because the roadway widening is currently occurring as part of development in the area. Traffic signals are located at Westgate Drive, Lower Sacramento Road, South Mills Avenue, South Ham Lane, South Hutchins Street/West Lane and South Stockton Street. A total of 47 properties are affected by the planned widening of Harney Lane. The first of two public meetings was held on June 8, 2010 at the Henderson Community Day School to present the preliminary Specific Plan, explain the purpose of a specific plan, request input on the plan and to give the attendees an opportunity to individually meet with the City staff. A total of 52 people attended the meeting. Following the public meeting, individual meetings were conducted with 55 residents living along Harney Lane. A second public meeting was held on January 25,201 1 at the Henderson Cominunity Day School to present residents with an update covering the comments fi-om the first public meeting, the follow up individual meetings and staff modifications to the Specific Plan. A total of 53 people attended the meeting. 1 Wage Harney Lane Specific Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS May 11, 2011 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 4 PURPOSE OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN...................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................ 4 GENERALPLAN...................................................................................................................... S LandUse................................................................................................................................. 6 RoadwayNetwork.................................................................................................................. 6 BicycleNetwork..................................................................................................................... 6 HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN....................................................................11 EXISTINGCONDITIONS....................................................................................................... 11 PROPOSED GEOMETRIC DESIGN...................................................................................... 11 Segment 1 — City Limits to Lower Sacramento Road.......................................................... 12 Segment 2 - Lower Sacramento Road to South Mills Avenue ............................................. 14 Segment 3 — South Mills Avenue to South Hutchins Street ................................................. 17 Segment 4 - South Hutchins Street to South Stockton Street ............................................... 18 CostaProperty ................................................................................................................... 19 TsutsumiProperty ............................................................................................................. 21 Intersections - Full and Limited Access................................................................................ 21 PUBLICOUTREACH.......................................................................................... 24 PUBLICMEETINGS............................................................................................................... 24 ONEON ONE MEETINGS..................................................................................................... 24 APPENDIX Appendix A -Proposed Geornetrics Appendix B -Intersection Geornetrics Appendix C -Costa and Tsutsuini Exhibits TECHNICAL APPENDIX Appendix D Xnion Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Feasibility Study Appendix E -Public Meeting Reports and One on One Meeting Records 2111 :j;c; Harney Lane Specific Plan LIST OF FIGURES May 11, 2011 Figure1 Vicinity Map................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 2 -City of Lodi General Plan Land Use Diagram......................................................... 7 Figure 3 -City of Lodi General Plan Development Phases ...................................................... 8 Figure 4 -City of Lodi General Plan Roadway Network......................................................... 9 Figure 5 -City of Lodi General Plan Bicycle Network........................................................... 10 Figure 6 -Segment 1 -Interim Roadway Section with Street Parking ................................ 13 Figure 7 -Segment 1 -Ultimate Roadway Section with Bicycle Lanes ................................ 14 Figure 8 -Segment 2 -Interim Roadway Section -Lower Sacramento Road to Legacy Estates.......................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 9 _Segment 2 -Interim Roadway Section -Legacy Estates to South Mills Avenue 16 Figure 10 -Segment 2 and 3 -IUltimate Roadway Section with Bicycle Lanes .................... 16 Figure 11 -Segment 3 _Ultimate Roadway with Bicycle Lanes and Street Parking On North............................................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 12 Alternative 1 _Dverhead with Side Slopes.......................................................... 19 Figure 13 Alternative 4 -Underpass with Side Slopes......................................................... 19 3113age Harney Lnne Specific Plan INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN May 11, 2011 The Harney Lane Specific Plan is a planning tool that will be used to guide the systematic implementation of the adopted General Plan. It effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan, individual development proposals, and future City capital improvement projects along the Harney Lane corridor. The Specific Plan has two purposes. One purpose of this Specific Plan is to complete a public outreach program attempting to reach a consensus regarding the appropriate roadway improvements to be constructed along the Harney Lane corridor. The second purpose is to establish the required right of way to serve anticipated growth and future traffic volume increases along the coil-idor. The Specific Plan was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. BACKGROUND The City of Lodi is a town located in the northern poi -tion of San Joaquin County, California with an estimated population of 63,000 residents. Incorporated in 1906, the City has grown from its origin as a stop along the Union Pacific Railroad to a mix of manufacturing, light industrial, commercial, residential and agricultural uses. It is bordered on the north by the Mokelumne River and Central California Traction Railroad on the east. Generally, Harney Lane defines the City limit on the south. The Cities of Lodi and Stockton are expanding towards each other. Lodi's sphere of influence extends one-half mile south of Harney Lane. As part of the City's General Plan an agricultural cluster study area was created to preserve a rural buffer between the two cities. Urban development will end approximately one half mile south of Harney Lane. A vicinity map of the area is provided in Figure 1. 4111ag.e Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Woodb" a oodblidge Golf & Country Club 1 V Nom Q7� Woodbridge Rd £ W Luc" Rd WOOdbrldg6 OF HARNEY LANE SPEC=PtAIR S _Armstrong Rd - _ __. _ .. Arms"" Rd -- Lo(I Air j adz = Figure I — Vicinity Map GENERAL PLAN The General Plan is the City's vision of how it will look 20 to 30 years in the future. The City of Lodi's General Plan was adopted by the City Council on April 7,2010. The General Plan established the mix of land uses along the Harney Lane corridor that will, in large part, be served by the circulation improvements to Harney Lane and the adjoining properties. 5 1 P a g c F Realty Rd on a 2.1� o I R A CL - E Kettleman Ln _. 5 o Cherokee emorwl Park E Naretisy Ln E Ma►neY Ln n The General Plan is the City's vision of how it will look 20 to 30 years in the future. The City of Lodi's General Plan was adopted by the City Council on April 7,2010. The General Plan established the mix of land uses along the Harney Lane corridor that will, in large part, be served by the circulation improvements to Harney Lane and the adjoining properties. 5 1 P a g c Harney Lane Specific Plan Land Use May 11, 2011 The City directs future growth and land uses based upon the General Plan. Along Harney Lane, the designated land uses are a mix of low, medium and high density residential, commercial, mixed use, schools and public parks. The land uses along the Harney Lane corridor designated by the General Plan are presented in Figure 2. Section 2.3 of the General Plan also included a discussion of the three phased implementation of the General Plan. The three phases are indicated on the snap in Figure 3. Phase 1 includes the development of vacant land within the current city limits and development of the land south of Harney Lane. There is no time fi-ame predicted for when this development would occur. Roadway Network As part of the General Plan the City reviews the forecasted traffic volumes based on the anticipated growth of the city. The number of lanes for each of the roads in the network is determined fi-om these forecasts. A minimum peak hour Level of Service (LOS) "E" is permitted throughout the city recognizing that some level of traffic congestion during the peak hour is acceptable and that infi-astructure design should be based on the conditions that predoniinate during most of each day. A LOS of "E" translates to a maximum delay at an intersection (signalized) of SS to 80 seconds. Other items that influence the size and look of a roadway are the posted speed and the access from side streets. Chapter S of the General Plan designates Harney Lane from Lower Sacramento Road to State Route 99 as a four lane expressway and west of Lower Sacramento Road it is designated as a minor arterial transitioning from the four lanes to two lanes to the west. An expressway is a high speed -high volume road that has a raised median in the middle to separate the opposing traffic (for safety reasons) and limited access to help maintain the speed along the segment. A minor arterial connects a residential area to major arterials and/or expressways. West of the city the area is expected to remain agricultural and Harney Lane connects the agricultural area to the planned roadway network. Figure 4 shows the roadway network presented in the General Plan. The General Plan establishes the future design of streets in new developments should generally snatch and extend the grid pattern of existing city streets. This is intended to disperse traffic and provide multiple connections to arterial or expressway streets. An intended benefit of the grid pattern is that citizens will be able to move within a developed area without having to access an arterial or expressway roadway. Bicycle Network Bicycle paths are classified as Class 1, 2 and 3. A Class 1 bicycle path is an independent path only used by bicycles and pedestrians. A Class 2 bicycle path is part of the roadway with vehicular traffic using the traveled way while the bicycle path is separately marked on the shoulder of the road. A Class 3 bicycle path is a road where vehicles and bicycles share the traveled way. Harney Lane fi-om the City limit on the west to State Route 99 is designated as a Class 2 bicycle lane. Figure S presents the bicycle network from the General Plan. 6 I i> T c Harney Lane Specific Plan FIGURE2-1: LAND USE DIAGRAM May 11, 2011 MA 0 Low Density Residential Mixed Use Corridor Medium Density Residential Business Park - High Density Residential 0 Office Commercial Public/Quasi-Public _ Downtown Mixed Use f. College/School (Placeholder) _ Mixed Use Center Industrial Figure 2 City of Lodi GeneralPlan Land UseDiagram Open Space Armstrong Road Agricultural Cluster Study Area Urban Reserve Sphere of Influence(2008) _._ City Limits (2008) 7 1 P a g e Harney Lane Specific Plan FIGURE 3-1: DEVELOPMENT PHASES May 11,2011 r� IME Phase I o. IJM Phase II 0 Phase III wcs Urban Reserve ....... Sphere of Influence (2008) ........ City Limits (2008) 9-6 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN Figure 3 — City d Lodi General Plan Development Phases 8 1 P a g e 3�3 Bd16 srw t 1 LI 0 0 Ei NO 8 mME (Booz) sllwll x(113 —•-- (SOOZ) aauangul )o aaayds ......... _yjom,OA[,fvatpvog uvld 1viauag zpo-I o dl1j — f, am,�ig peoilley laau5 leDol pauueld --------- Pails le"l JolOIallo:) Pauueld .....-. ioualloD lepalayjou!WPauueld uumms lepaUV ioulw � NVld MUM) IOOI 1 9-9 leualaV-few 9� (emssajdx3 Zl (emy6lHalels (emaaj j N W31SAS AVMGVOH NVld lVH3N39 :Z-9 MOM IIOZ `II fvw uvld ofipads auv7 d'au-IVH Harney Lane Specific Plan FIGURE5-3 GENERAL PLAN BICYCLESYSTEM May 11, 2011 eeeeeeeeeFuture Class I Bike Paths ......... Sphere of Influence (2008) � Existing Class 11 Bike Lanes ---- City Limits (2008) 0 12 1 2 �.�. Future Class II Bike Lanes was - Existing Class III Bike Lanes - Future Class III Bike Lanes 0-10 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN Figure 5 — City of Lodi GeneralPlan Bicycle Network 101Page Harney Lane Specific Plnn May 11, 2011 HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS Hai-ney Lane is located at the southern edge of the current City limits and the City's development. The City limits run along the south side of the street right of way with San Joaquin County to the south. The City's sphere of influence extends further south to a point halfway between Harney Lane and Arinstrong Road. Harney Lane is a two lane road with a posted speed of 45 mph. The study area includes approximately 2 1/2 miles of roadway from the City's western limit to South Stockton Street that is partly within the City and partly within San Joaquin County. Ultimately, most of the roadway is anticipated to be annexed as future development occurs along the corridor. Development along Harney Lane is a mix of urban residential, rural residential and agriculture. The north side of Hai-ney Lane is primarily single family residential development consisting of new subdivisions with block walls facing Harney Lane. Within the City limits, Harney Lane has been widened to the ultimate width on the north where recent development has occurred. The south side is a mix of agriculture (grapes and cherries) and rural residences. West and east of Lower Sacramento Road single family residences are present on both sides of the road and most are in San Joaquin County. Between South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street, Harney Lane crosses the main Union Pacific Railroad. PROPOSED GEOMETRIC DESIGN Harney Lane is planned to be the primary east -west connector across the portion of the city south of Kettleman Lane. A second east -west connector is Century Boulevard as identified in the General Plan but completion of the crossing over the Union Pacific Railroad will not occur in the near future. According to the General Plan Harney Lane is classified as a minor arterial west of Lower Sacramento Road and an expressway from Lower Sacramento Road to State Route 99. Lower Sacramento Road is also designated an expressway (the main north -south connector on the west side of the city) connecting Harney Lane to Kettleman Lane. The proposed geoinetrics for Hai-ney Lane reflect these secondary arterial and expressway designations and are provided in Appendix A. The proposed geometrics reflect the ultimate improvements needed to serve the traffic expected to result from development of the General Plan. It is anticipated that a phased construction approach will be utilized to construct the ultimate improvements. Therefore, 111P"itrC Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 interim geometric plans will likely be implemented to deal with constraints represented by cost, relocation of structures, right of way acquisition, and accident history. In the event a specific development project occurs along the corridor, ultimate improvements will be required to be constructed in conjunction with that project. An example of this is the widening of Harney Lane that is presently under construction at the Reynolds Ranch Shopping Center Project. Existing traffic signals at Lower Sacramento Road, South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street will be modified in conjunction with the construction of interim and ultimate improvements at these intersections. In the case of the Lower Sacramento Road intersection, it is likely that two separate intersection improvement and traffic signal modification projects will be required due to right of way constraints. In the event accident levels increase, it may be necessary to widen portions of Harney Lane to improve safe operations. An example of this would be a new traffic signal at an intersection with lane additions for turn movements and stacking. New traffic signals are planned for the intersections at South Mills Avenue and South Ham Lane. Another example may be widening the segment of the corridor currently within San Joaquin County east of Lower Sacramento Road. An important aspect of the design of expressways is the limitation on the number of intersections and other turning movement onto and from the expressway. This specific plan assumes that intersections with median openings will be allowed only at Westgate Drive, Lower Sacramento Road, South Mills Avenue, South Ham Lane, South Hutchins Street, and South Stockton Street. Residential intersections without a median opening (right turn in and right turn out only) will be allowed only at Legacy Way, Poppy Drive, Winchester Drive and Banyan Drive on the north side of Harney Lane. Further discussion of the geometric design and phased improvement of Harney Lane is provided below. The coi-ridor is divided into four distinct segments for discussion purposes. They are: Segment 1) City Limits to Lower Sacramento Road, Segment 2) Lower Sacramento Road to South Mills Avenue, Segment 3) South Mills Avenue to South Hutchins Street and Segment 4) South Hutchins Street to South Stockton Street. This segmentation is not intended to reflect the phasing of improvements nor the sequencing. Segment 1— City Limits to Lower Sacramento Road Harney Lane west of Lower Sacramento lies primarily within San Joaquin County and partly within the City. The County portion of this segment is anticipated to be annexed into the City but probably not in the near future. The north side of Harney Lane in this area is within the City's sphere of influence but the south side is not and is expected to remain in the County. The area consists of single family residences on both sides of the road along with Henderson Community Day School on the south side. The houses on the north side are set back a minimum 121Pt�47; Harney Lane Specific Plan. May 11, 2011 27 feet from the existing right of way while the houses on the south are set back from 2 feet to 25 feet from the existing right of way. The area is at the southwestern edge of the city limits and future development. Because of this, two iinproveinent alternatives were developed for this segment. The first is an interim alternative with a smaller right of way width of 69.5 feet designated to handle a smaller volume of traffic while minimizing the impacts to the residences on the south side. The interim alternative consists of three lanes. The three lanes include one lane in each direction and a middle two-way left turn lane. The two-way left turn lane improves the safety to the residents turning into their driveways while allowing the traffic to flow. Vehicle parking is provided for on both sides but may need to be restricted at the Lower Sacramento Road intersection. Sidewalk is included on both sides of the street and signal inodifications are necessary at Lower Sacramento Road. The sidewalk on the south side would not extend westerly beyond Henderson Community Day School. Since the houses on the south are closest to the road, the existing south side right of way was held, wherever possible, and the improvements were pushed to the not-th side. Nine and one half feet of right of way would be needed on the not-th side of the street. On the south, the two properties closest to Lower Sacramento Road would be affected. The amount of right of way required at these locations varies from zero to three feet. By taking this approach, no housing structures were impacted. The geometric cross section of this alternative is presented in Figure 6 and details of the plan layout and cross sections are provided in Appendix A. The interim alternative is not expected to be needed until development of the Southwest Gateway project occurs at its southern most limits and new street, Westgate Drive, west of Extension Road, has been constructed. The estimated year of construction for Westgate Drive is 2020. The year of construction of the interim alternative will be determined in the future based upon traffic volumes and operations but likely will not occur prior to 2025. R/W 8' 10' I SHOULDER STREET PARKING 69.5' 11' 14' TWO-WAY LEFT TURN LEFT TURN R/W 11' 10' --5-5' SHOULDER `GA STREET PARKING Figure 6 —Segment I — Interim Roadway Section with Street Parking (Looking East) Segment 1 is designated as a minor arterial in the General Plan. The minor arterial designation is described as connecting the regional road network (Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane east of Lower Sacramento Road) with local roads with one typical characteristic being access limitations. The intent of the arterial designation was primarily to allow for greater access controls as future development occurs. Arterials, in the context of the General Plan may be either two or four lanes. 1311'< rd Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 The ultimate improvement alternative for Segment I would closely conform to the City standard section for a secondary arterial which measures 64 feet from curb to curb including four travel lanes (48 feet) and two bicycle lanes (16 feet). The ultimate right of way would be 77.5 feet including an eight foot sidewalk and setback on the north side and a five and one-half foot sidewalk on the south side. The two and one-half foot setback on the south side is not provided to limit encroachment of the existing residences on the south side of Harney Lane. The geometric cross section diagram of the secondary arterial is provided in Figure 7 and details of the plan layout and cross sections are provided in Appendix A. The iinproveinents would need to be installed when traffic from additional development determines that it is necessary. The additional right of way will be obtained from both sides of the street to align it with the Harney Lane iinproveinents east of Lower Sacramento Road. The houses on the north are still set back far enough that the extra right of way will not impact the houses directly but would reduce the size of the front yards by ten feet. On the south, ten properties are affected and three properties would need to be purchased to build the improvements. The three properties belong to the Geist (APN# 058-070-03), Hernandez (APN# 058-070-04), and Williains (APN# 058-070-05) families and are located nearest to Lower Sacramento Road. 77.5, Figure 7—Segment I — Ultimate Roadway Section with Bicycle Lanes (Looking East) Segment 2 - Lower Sacramento Road to South Mills Avenue Along this segment, Harney Lane is populated by single family residences along the south side and approximately one-half of the north side. The remainder of this segment on the north side has been developed as the Legacy Estates subdivision. The houses in the Legacy Estates subdivision do not fi-ont Harney Lane like the others do. Similar to Segment 1, Harney Lane between Lower Sacramento Road and South Mills Avenue is expected to be widened in phases. They will again be referred to as interim and ultimate alternatives. Interim improvements will be implemented when the City deems traffic voluines or accident levels have created unsafe conditions. The cross section dimension for the interim alternatives varies by location along Segment 2. To simplify the discussion, two sub- segments are presented below. 141Pat,e Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Lower Sacrainento Road to Legacy Estates (City Limit) The existing residences along this sub -segment are located within San Joaquin County and development is not expected to take place nor are the properties anticipated to annex to the City. The interim alternative right of way requirement ranges fi-om 62 feet to 69 feet. The interim improvements will be installed in portions of the segment that are not anticipated to experience development in the near future or ever at all. To reduce impacts to residences resulting from construction of the interim improvements, the widening will be limited to a four foot shoulder with no bike lanes or sidewalks. Between Lower Sacramento Road and Legacy Estates (City Limit) traffic will be separated by a striped median. It is anticipated the need for these interim improvements will be driven by the deterioration to unacceptable levels of the operations at the signalized intersection of Harney Lane and Lower Sacramento Road. These interim improvements add a westbound right turn lane at this intersection. The interim and ultimate alternative geometric designs for this sub -segment are presented in Figure 8 and 10 and Appendix A. To construct the interim alternative, right of way acquisition is required on both sides of Harney Lane. On the north side, up to seven feet is required at the Schumacher (APN #058-230- 10) and Galindo (APN # 058-230-06) properties. On the south side, seven feet is required along the Hayn (APN 058-070-07), Bell (APN 058-070-08), and Goff (APN 058-070-09) properties. At the time of acquisition, the City will need to work with San Joaquin County to determine if the acquisition will include only that needed for the interim alternative or include that needed for the ultimate alternative. Var RAW Var 62'-69' Raw Figure 8 —Segment 2 —Interim Roadway Section — Lower Sacramento Road to Legacy Estates (Looking East) Legacy Estates (City Limit) to South Mills Avenue For the most part, the north side of Harney Lane along this sub -segment has been developed as the Legacy Estates subdivision. The south side of the roadway consists of rural residential homes built on fairly large lots. The homes are generally well set back from the existing roadway. Again, interim and ultimate alternative geometric designs for this sub -segment are presented in Figures 9 and 10 and Appendix A. The interim alternative includes four travel lanes, center striped turning lane, full shoulder improvements (bike lane, sidewalk and landscaping) on the north side and a four foot shoulder 151P i a Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 on the south side. Additional right of way acquisition is required on the south side that ranges from seven to twelve and one-half feet. The affected properties include Wright (APN 058-070- 12), Velente (APN 058-070-13), S. Everitt (APN 058-070-14), Scholl (APN 058-070-15/16), Tamura (APN 058-090-01), Tanabe (APN 058-090-02), R. Everitt (APN 058-090-03), and Manassero (APN 058-090-04). On the north side, 17 feet of right of way will be required from Lackyard (APN 058-230-21), the property at the northwest comer of the Harney Lane and South Mills Avenue intersection to construct the interim alternative. -96.5' 0.5' ATTACHED 'SIDEWALK _ Figure 9 —Segment 2 —Interim Roadway Section —Legacy Estates to South Mills Avenue (LookiizgEast) For the ultimate alternative the right of way dimension is 110 feet and includes four travel lanes, landscaped medianileft turn lane, bike lanes in each direction and fifteen feet behind the curb for five foot sidewalk, landscaping and utilities. Additional right of way acquisition is required on the south side that ranges from 26 to 31 feet. These amounts are inclusive of the right of way required to construct the interim alternative. It is expected that most of the right of way will be acquired through dedication at the time development occurs. The General Plan includes a future "Local Street" accessing the area south of Harney Lane (See Figure 4). It is located west of Legacy Way. The location of the road shown in the specific plan is approximate. The exact location will be determined by the first property to develop that will be required to dedicate and construct the entire roadway. The road will have a 50 foot right of way, a 34 foot curb to curb dimension and include sidewalks on both sides. R/W , , R/W - 5' IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS - 5' IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS - 7' IN COMMERCIAL AREAS - 7' IN COMMERCIAL AREAS Figure 10 —Segment 2 and 3 — Ultimate Roadway Secdoiz with Bicycle Lanes (Looking East) 16111aigc. Harney Lune Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Segment 3 — South Mills Avenue to South Hutchins Street Similar to the previous segment, existing single family residential development on the not-th side sets the right of way limit of the ultimate improvements. Existing land use on the south side is agriculture. Within this area Harney Lane crosses a Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) canal. The WID canal crossing was constructed several years ago and its design anticipated the widening of Harney Lane such that no changes to the crossing are required. There is no interim alternative for Harney Lane within this segment. The Harney Lane ultimate cross section for this segment is the same 110 foot section as Segment 2 as presented in Figure 10 except at the WID canal crossing. At this location the meandering sidewalk is replaced by a roadway -contiguous sidewalk. The four lanes of traveled way and the median are maintained. East of the canal to South Hutchins Street on the not-th side of Harney Lane are nineteen existing residential propei-ties that have driveway access onto Harney Lane that will continue to be provided for and coinphinented with on street parking and a bicycle lane. In this area a total of fourteen feet is provided on the not-th side of the roadway to accommodate the parking and bicycle lane. The cross section for this poi -tion of Segment 3 is provided in Figure 11 and also in Appendix A. R /W R /W - 5' IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS - 7' IN COMMERCIAL AREAS Figure 11 —Segment 3 - UltimateRoadway with Bicycle Lanes and Street Parking On North (Looking East) The houses on the north will be impacted by the construction of the ultimate iniprovements because the landscaped median will restrict the property owners to only turning west from their driveways. In addition, as traffic volumes increase on the roadway, the ability to freely back out of their driveway will be difficult during peak volume periods. The General Plan includes a future "Local Street" accessing the area south of Harney Lane (See Figure 4). It is located near Poppy Drive. The location of the road shown in the specific plan is approximate. The exact location will be determined by the first property to develop that will be required to dedicate and construct the entire roadway. The road will have a 50 foot right of way, a 34 foot curb to curb dimension and include sidewalks on both sides. Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Construction of the ultimate alternative will require acquisition or dedication of fifteen feet of additional right of way in the vicinity of the intersection of Harney Lane and South Hutchins Street. This includes an extra twelve feet of right of way near South Hutchins Street for a future dedicated right turn lane for the eastbound Harney Lane traffic to southbound South Hutchins Street. Along the remainder of this segment, the right of way required to construct the ultimate alternative was dedicated as part of the South Lodi Sanitary Sewer Study and the Harney Lane Lift Station project. Segment 4 - South Hutchins Street to South Stockton Street This segment is unique to the others due to the Union Pacific Railroad crossing that occurs in the middle of the segment and special considerations required to support the existing agricultural/industrial uses on the south side of Harney Lane. Information, phasing, and alternatives for Segment 4, the grade separation, and the Costa (APN 058-110-47) and Tsutsumi (APN 058-130-24) agricultural operations are separately presented below. The future right of way requirements along segment 4 are indicated on the diagrams provided in Appendix A. Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation The City has plans for a grade separation at the railroad crossing as presented in the Harney Lane/Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Feasibility Study (Mark Thomas and Company, 2010). The feasibility study, dated August 10,2010, analyzed the benefits and costs of different alternatives. On the north side, the existing residential subdivision has been set back from Harney Lane in anticipation of a grade separation ultimately being constructed. A 30 foot right of way has been secured by the City on the Costa property, however, the grade separation project will require more right of way from the Costa's property and the Tsutsumi Property. Right of way requirements for the four grade separation alternatives are the greatest for the two alternatives which include earth embankments in lieu of retaining wall structures. The two embankment alternatives include an overcrossing and an undercrossing of the railroad. The schematic cross sections for each Alternative 1 and 4 from the feasibility study are presented in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. Alternative 1 is an overcrossing structure with side slopes and this alternative requires the greatest area of new right of way. Alternative 4 is an undercrossing with side slopes and requires the second greatest area of new right of way. An environmental review of the alternative grade separation crossings will be conducted by the City in conjunction with the preliminary engineering design for the project. Once the environmental review and alternative selection has been completed, full design of the grade separation project will commence and final determination of right of way requirements will be made. A copy of the Feasibility Study is included in the Technical Appendix. 1811''1 - C Harney Lane Specific Plan EX R/W May 11, 2011 15'_ VAR 3' 30' I 30' 3' VAR 15' MIN 12'-,-12' VAS 12'-,- �,12',__-► I_ RAISED MEDIAN PROP R/W I I RAILROAD ACCESS AND/OR UTILITY CORRIDOR Figure 12 —Alternative I — Overhead with Side Slopes (Looking East) 30' I TEMP ROAWAY � I EX PROP RNVAR �- 30' 30 2.5' VAR ,^ R� 15' 15' MIN 2.5.MIN i-00 6', RAISED MEDIAN '2 2 Figure 13 —Alternative 4 — Underpass with Side Slopes (LookiizgEast) Agricultural operations at the two large properties, Costa and Tsutsumi, on the south side of Harney Lane will be impacted by construction of the interim and ultimate improvements along this segment of the Harney Lane corridor. The important issues associated with these property owners are described in the following two sections. Costa Property The Costa property is located between South Hutchins Street and the Union Pacific Railroad. The Costa's operate an agricultural packing plant in the center of their property which is accessed from West Lane and Harney Lane. The property has two driveways on Harney Lane and two driveways on West Lane used by employees, harvesting equipment and large trucks. The first driveway on Harney Lane is located just west of the railroad tracks and is used for access by large harvesting equipment. The second driveway is located just east of the South Hutchins Street intersection and is used for access by large trucks. The West Lane driveways will not be affected by the Harney Lane Specific Plan project. The Harney Lane and South Hutchins Street intersection is envisioned to be constructed in two phases. Each phase provides the necessary improvements to Harney Lane while limiting the 19 1 P Harney Lane Specific Plan May I1, 2011 impacts to the Costa property. The first phase is an interim alternative and the second phase is the ultimate widening of Harney Lane along the Costa property. The phasing exhibits are presented in Appendix C. Phase 1: South Hutchins Street Intersection Improvements. The first phase widens the South Hutchins Street intersection to accommodate the proposed medical center at the southwest corner of the intersection. The first phase includes widening Harney Lane along a portion of the Costa property to add a second through eastbound and westbound lane and relocation of the easterly driveway and gate to a point approximately 300 feet east of the South Hutchins Street intersection. The median along the Costa property would be striped to allow left turns into their driveway along Harney Lane. The improvements will include the creation of an eastbound pull out lane to facilitate trucks turning into the new driveway. This work will require the removal of cherry trees within the existing right of way and within the orchard to allow for construction of the new driveway. A diagram of the phase 1 improvements is provided in Appendix C. Phase 2: Construct the Railroad Grade Separation. A grade separation at the Union Pacific Railroad is required to add two additional through lanes to Harney Lane. Unlike the other sections of Harney Lane, the grade separation will not be constructed in association with adjacent development. The grade separation will be a City sponsored project and will be constructed as soon as funding is available. With this phase, the Costa's will lose full access to both driveways on Harney Lane by virtue of the raised median that will be constructed with the grade separation. Additional right of way will be needed. The amount will be determined once the preferred design alternative is selected as part of the environmental review of the project. The Costa driveway west of Banyan Drive will be restricted to right turn in and right turn out movements. The driveway would be treated like an intersecting street without a pull out lane the same as for the Banyan Drive intersection on the north side of Harney Lane and all other intersections along Harney Lane. The driveway will be approximately 300 feet east of the South Hutchins Street intersection in order to locate it away from the inclined portion of the grade separation. When the property is developed into something other than the Costa's agricultural operation the driveway will be the approximate location for the future road. The roadway will be required to be dedicated at that time. The road will have a 50 foot right of way, a 34 foot curb to curb dimension and include sidewalks on both sides. A diagram of the phase 2 improvements is provided in Appendix C. The right of way requirements based on Figures 12 and 13 are indicated in the phase 2 diagram and other exhibits in Appendix A and C. 201Pag( Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 City staff met with the Costas in three one on one meetings to discuss the impacts the Harney Lane Specific Plan would have on their operations and access to their property. The Costas expressed concerns about the effects the widening of Harney Lane would have on the access to and operations of their business. The specific plan addresses the concerned expressed by the Costas. Tsutsumi Property Mr. Tsutsumi operates a vineyard located between the Union Pacific Railroad and South Stockton Street. Access to the vineyard is available at two locations on Harney Lane, west of South Stockton Street. A row of houses is situated between the Tsutsumi property and South Stockton Street blocking access to South Stockton Street. There is no interim alternative for Harney Lane within this area. The ultimate construction of the railroad grade separation will affect the operations at the Tsutsunii property. The grade separation will widen Harney Lane and construct a raised median. The raised median prevents the harvesting equipment from making westbound left turns into the Harney Lane driveway. The harvesting equipment will need to enter the property fi-om the eastbound approach. The driveways on Harney Lane will need to be widened beyond their current width to accoininodate the trucks turning in the property. A diagram of the Tsutsuini access configuration is provided in Appendix C. Mr. Tsutsuini is amenable to this option as well as any other option which would maintain his operation. He suggested having the City obtain access to his property from the extension of South Stockton Street by buying one of the houses facing South Stockton Street. Intersections - Full and Limited Access The expressway design for Harney Lane between Lower Sacramento Road and State Route 99 will limit full access intersections by spacing thein approximately one half mile apart. The planned full access intersections are Westgate Drive, Lower Sacramento Road, South Mills Avenue, South Hain Lane, South Hutchins Street, South Stockton Street and Reynolds Ranch Parkway/Melby Avenue. The Reynolds Ranch Parkway/Melby Avenue intersection has been constructed as part of the Reynolds Ranch project. Limited access intersections are those that restrict turning movements to right turns from and right turns onto Harney Lane with a prohibition of left turn movements. Planned limited access intersections include Legacy Way, Crown Place, Poppy Drive, Winchester Drive, Banyan Drive and the four future road intersections on the south side of Harney Lane. A short discussion about the improvements at each full access intersection is given below. A diagram of the geonietrics for each intersection is included in Appendix B. Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Westgate Drive — Westgate Drive, the future road across from the Henderson Community Day School, is part of the Southwest Gateway planned development. The road will form a three-legged intersection on Harney Lane from the not-th and will be striped with crosswalks due to its proximity to the school. When the Southwest Gateway development is constructed the timing of the intersection construction will be determined. It is included in the interim and ultimate proposed geoinetrics for this segment of Harney Lane. A traffic signal will be installed in the future if required. 2. Lower Sacramento Road - Lower Sacramento Road is the main north -south connector between Stockton and Lodi on the west side of Lodi. Between Kettleman Lane and Harney Lane, Lower Sacramento Road is designated an expressway. It is a main part of the city's grid network planned to serve large volumes of traffic moving from Kettleman Lane to the southeast area of Lodi. Harney Lane is part of this connection. To serve the high volume of southbound to eastbound left turn traffic, dual left turn lanes are incorporated into the intersection geometries. The existing traffic signal at the intersection will need to be modified to accommodate the additional through lanes and left turn lane. 3. South Mills Avenue — South Mills Avenue is a collector street that will be extended southward as new development occurs. It will become a full access intersection on Harney Lane. Signals will be installed with the extension of South Mills Avenue. A single left turn lane will be provided for eastbound and westbound traffic on Harney Lane. The intersection is currently signalized and will need to be modified to accommodate the widening. 4. South Ham Lane — Similar to South Mills Avenue, South Ham Lane currently tees into Harney Lane and will be extended southward as new development occurs. The General Plan designates South Ham Lane as a major arterial to the not-th of Harney Lane and a collector road to the south. Signals will be installed with the extension of South Hain Lane and single left turn lanes will be provided for eastbound and westbound Harney Lane traffic. South Hutchins Street — Similar to Lower Sacramento Road this is a main connector road between Lodi and Stockton. In the General Plan South Hutchins Street is a major arterial which serves the downtown area of the city. At the intersection it will have dual left turns for the north and southbound traffic. Single left turn lanes are provided for the Harney Lane traffic. Two eastbound and westbound through lane will be provided. Traffic studies indicate the future requirement for a dedicated right turn lane for the eastbound to southbound turning movement on Harney Lane. In keeping with the General Plan policy to promote pedestrian friendly intersections this dedicated right turn lane is included in the specific plan but is not recommended for construction in the foreseeable future. 221Pa ,c Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 Right of way for the additional lanes is required on the south side of Harney Lane as indicated on the diagrams provided in Appendix A. The intersection is currently signalized and will need to be modified to accommodate the widening. 6. South Stockton Street — The roadway tees into Harney Lane with a dead end road extending to the south. In the future the dead end road will be widened allowing access to the Reynolds Ranch project in the south area. Similar to South Hutchins Street intersection the eastbound Harney Lane will initially be served by a through lane and a combined through/right turn lane. When South Stockton Street is extended and the traffic wail -ants it, the combined through/right turn lane will become a through lane and a dedicated right tui -n lane will be added. The right of way is reserved with the Specific Plan. The existing signal will need to be modified. The intersection is currently signalized and will be modified to accommodate the widening. 23 111 i g Harney Lane Specific Plan PUBLIC OUTREACH PUBLIC MEETINGS May 11, 2011 Two public meetings were held at Henderson Community Day School. The first public meeting was held on June 8,20 10 to present the preliminary specific plan, explain the purpose of a specific plan, request input on the plan and to give the attendees an opportunity to individually meet with the City staff. A total of 52 people attended the meeting. A second public meeting was held on January 25,201 1 to present residents with an update addressing the comments from the first public meeting, the follow up individual meetings and staff modifications to the specific plan. A total of 53 people attended the second meeting. A full report on each meeting is provided in the Technical Appendix. The format of the two public meetings was an open house with work stations exhibiting the four segments. A staff member was present to explain the specific plan and to answer questions at each station. A power point presentation was given describing the need for the specific plan, the proposed geometries, the timing of the implementation and contact information which the residents could use if they had further questions. Questions were received and answers provided as reported in the minutes of the meetings. ONE ON ONE MEETINGS As part of the public meeting, the City staff gave the residents an opportunity to meet later for a one on one meeting to explain the specific plan further and discuss the impact to their property. Since not all of the citizens could attend the public meeting two separate letters went out to all the property owners whose properties would be impacted. This outreach provided them additional opportunities to have a one on one meeting with the City staff to discuss the specific plan and their property. A total of 55 residents took this opportunity to meet with the project staff. The meetings were either held at the property owner's residence or at the Public Works office. Most of the meetings were informational since many of these people were not able to attend the public meeting. Discussion points included: • What is the purpose of the Specific Plan? The Specific Plan acts as a blue print of what Harney Lane will look like based on the policies set foi-th in the General Plan. City staff will use the specific plan to guide development of properties along Harney Lane to provide for implementation of the Harney Lane expressway. How much right of way will be needed from my property? An exhibit for each property was created showing the amount of right of way needed. If the property was 24P' i g c Harney Lane Specific Plan May 11, 2011 located in a segment where an interim condition occurred, a second exhibit was created showing the right of way needed during the interim phase. When is this development and street widening going to occur? This was a significant concern and a common question. It was explained that the specific plan was a planning document to be used by the City to direct the individual developers as to what would be expected of thein with respect to the widening of Harney Lane. The street widening was not expected to occur in the near future. Much of the widening will occur with development. If widening was required, the City would acquire right of way through a formal acquisition process. • How will I get compensated for the right of way taken? The City will require a development project to dedicate needed right way as part of the project. Acquisition of right of way outside the limits of new developnient may follow an informal process if initiated by a developer or a formal process if initiated by the City. • By acquiring the right of way the house will be closer to the roadway making the property less valuable. Will I be compensated for that? This is referred to as "severance damages" and would be included in the offer to acquire the property. There were some questions and concerns that were brought up from the residents that needed follow up on the staffs part. These concerns were: • For the segment west of Lower Sacramento Road, by acquiring right of way, you are reducing the size of the driveway and front yards; why not include street parking for the residences? The recommend geometrics include street parking. • Why does the median have to be so wide? Less property would need to be taken if you reduced the size of the median. The median is sixteen feet wide and provides room for the left turn pockets and narrow median at the intersections. 2511113( Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration y HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN April 2011 Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration For HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN April 2011 Prepared by the City of Lodi Department of Public Works 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section1: Introduction...................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 -Lead Agency...............................................................................................................1-1 1.3 - Purpose and Document Organization.....................................................................1-2 1.4 - Incorporation by Reference.......................................................................................1-3 Section2: Project Description.......................................................................................................2-1 2.1 - Project Background....................................................................................................2-1 2.2 - Project Location...........................................................................................................2-1 2.3 - Project Purpose and Objectives................................................................................2-1 2.4 - Project Description.....................................................................................................2-1 2.5 - Leady Agency Name and Address..........................................................................2-9 2.6 - Contact Persons and Phone Numbers ..................................................................... 2-9 2.7 - Project Sponsor's Name and Address .....................................................................2-9 2.8 - General Plan Designations........................................................................................ 2-9 2.9 - Zoning Designations.................................................................................................. 2-9 2.10 - Project Construciton................................................................................................2-9 2.11 - Required Project Approvals..................................................................................2-10 2.12 - Other Project Assumption.....................................................................................2-10 2.13 - Techincal Studies....................................................................................................2-10 Section3: Environmental Determination...................................................................................... 3 3.1- Environmental Factors Potentially Affected...........................................................3-1 3.2 - Environemntal Determination.................................................................................. 3-1 3.3 - Notice of Availability.................................................................................................3-2 3.4 - Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration..............................................................3-4 Section4: Discussion of Environmental Evaluation.................................................................... 4 4.1 Aesthetics....................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Agricultural Resources.............................................................................................4-4 4.3 Air Quality..................................................................................................................4-7 4.4 Greenhosue Gas Emissions....................................................................................4-10 4.5. Biological Resources................................................................................................4-12 4-6 Cultural Resources..................................................................................................4-15 4-7 Geology and Soils....................................................................................................4-17 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.......................................................................4-20 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality...............................................................................4-24 4.10 Land Use and Planning...........................................................................................4-28 4.11 Mineral Resources...................................................................................................4-30 4.12 Noise..........................................................................................................................4-31 4.13 Population and Housing.........................................................................................4-34 4.14 Public Services..........................................................................................................4-36 4.15 Recreation.................................................................................................................4-38 4.16 Transportation/ Traffic ............................................................................................4-39 4.17 Utilities and Service Systems.................................................................................4-42 4.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance.....................................................................4-46 Section 5: Dicuments Referenced.................................................................................................5-1 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit1: Location Map...................................................................................................................2-3 Exhibit 2: Existing Land Use Diagram...........................................................................................2-4 Exhibit3: Development Phases......................................................................................................2-5 Exhibit4: Aerial Map.......................................................................................................................2-6 Exhibit 5: Harney Lane Specific Plan Design...............................................................................2-8 This document is divided into the following sections: 1.0 INTRODUCTION This section provides an introduction and describes the purpose and organization of this document. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This section provides a detailed description of the proposed project and any alternatives considered. 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This section provides a summary of environmental factors that would be would be potentially affected by this project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST This section describes the environmental setting for each of the environmental subject areas, evaluates a range of impacts classified as "no impact", "less than significant impact", "less than significant with mitigation incorporated", or "potentially significant" in response to the environmental checklist, and provides mitigation measures, where appropriate, to mitigate potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level; and provides an environmental determination of the project. 5.0 DOCUMENTS REFERENCED This section provides a summary of mitigation measures for the proposed project. Section 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 -INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY GUIDANCE The document is an Initial Study (IS) with supporting environmental studies, which provides justification for a Negative Declaration (ND) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the City of Lodi Harney Lane Specific Plan project (Project) in the City of Lodi. The IS/ND is a public document to be used by the City of Lodi (City) acting as lead agency, to determine whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA. If the lead agency finds substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may have a significant effect on the environment that cannot be mitigated, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the lead agency is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), use a previously prepared EIR and supplement that EIR, or prepare a subsequent EIR to analyze the project at hand. If the agency finds no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant impact on the environment with mitigation, an MND shall be prepared with a written statement describing the reasons why the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore, why it does not require the preparation of an EIR (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a Negative Declaration (ND) or MND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either: a) The IS shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b) The IS identifies potentially significant effects, but: 1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed MND and IS are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and 2) There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. This IS/MND has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15000 et seq. 1.2 LEAD AGENCY The lead agency is the public agency with primary responsibility over a proposed project. Where two or more public agencies will be involved with a project, CEQA Guidelines Section 15051 provides criteria for identifying the lead agency. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15051(b)(1), "The lead agency will normally be the agency with general governmental powers rather than an agency with a single or limited purpose." In addition, Section 15051(c) states "where more than one public agency equally meet the criteria in subdivision (b), the agency which will act first on the project in question shall be the lead agency". The City Public Works Department has initiated preliminary design of the project. The Project lies within the City limits of the City of Lodi and requires approval from the City of Lodi City Council. Therefore, based on the criteria described above, the lead agency for the proposed project is the City of Lodi, Public Works Department. 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.3 PURPOSE AND DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION The purpose of this Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration (IS/ND) is to identify the potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan, which seeks to reach a consensus of the most appropriate roadway improvements to be implemented in the Harney Lane corridor to accommodate anticipated growth and traffic volume increases and establish the necessary right of way needed to be acquired, reserved and/or dedicated in order to accommodate the roadway improvements. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City is the Lead Agency in the preparation of this IS/ND, and any additional environmental documentation required for the project. The intended use of this document is to provide information to support conclusions regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project. The IS/ND provides the basis for input from public agencies, organizations, and interested members of the public. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration tiers of the City of Lodi General Plan 2010 and General Plan EIR 2010 (SCH#2009022075), which serve as the project's program level EIR. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan intends to refine the vision, goals, policies, and actions of the City's General Plan by establishing area -specific goals and policies to guide land use patterns in the Specific Plan Area (along Harney Lane). The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves land that is incorporated into, and planned for development in Lodi s 2010 General Plan. Having been so included, all General Plan level environmental effects were of necessity, therein addressed. As a tiered document, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the project relies, in part, on the General Plan 2010 and General Plan EIR 2010, for: 1) A discussion of general background and setting information for environmental topic areas; 2) Overall growth -related issues, land uses, level of service related to traffic; 3) Issues that were evaluated in sufficient detail in the 2010 General Plan EIR, for which there are no significant new information or changes in circumstances that would require further analysis; and 4) Analysis of long-term cumulative impacts. This Tiered Initial Study/Negative Declaration analyzes the potential site-specific and localized impacts of the Project. As the analysis demonstrates, there are no new significant impacts identified due to the project since no physical improvements or construction activities are proposed by the project itself at this time. The Harney Lane Specific Plan serves as an implementing arm of the City's General Plan; therefore, the General Plan EIR has assessed many project related impacts. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Since specific development outcomes and impacts cannot be accurately assessed at this time, this document will discuss the general impacts imposed by the Project. Because there are no new significant impacts identified there are no new alternatives to the project that need be examined and therefore, the previous analysis is sufficient. Additionally, because there are no new significant impacts identified, the cumulative impacts remain the same. Thus, the information contained in this 1-2 1.0 INTRODUCTION subsequent Negative Declaration is sufficient to meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15163. 1.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE The references outlined below were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The documents are available for review at the City of Lodi, Community Development Department, located at 221 West Pine Street, California 95240. • City of Lodi General Plan 2010. State law requires every city and county to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of that city and county. The City of Lodi General Plan, adopted April 2010, contains goals, policies, and programs which are intended to guide land use and development decisions for the next twenty years. The General Plan consists of eight elements, or chapters, which together fulfill the requirements for a general plan. The General Plan chapter include the Land Use; Growth Management and Infrastructure; Community Design and Livability; Transportation; Parks, Recreation and Open Space; Conservation; Safety, and Noise Elements. • City of Lodi General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, February 2010. The City of Lodi General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report (General Plan FEIR), SCH2O09022075, is intended to provide information to public agencies and the general public regarding the potential environmental impacts related to implementation of the City of Lodi General Plan. The purpose of the EIR is "to identify the significant effects of a project on the environment, to identify alternatives to the project and to indicate the manner in which significant impacts can be mitigated or avoided." • City of Lodi General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, November 2009. The City of Lodi, Pubic Review Draft General Plan Environmental Impact Report, SCH2O09022075, is a first-tier evaluation of the environmental effects associated with the adoption of the updated City of Lodi General Plan. • City of Lodi Municipal Code. The City of Lodi Zoning Code is contained in Chapter 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code (LMC) and represents the minimum requirement for the promotion of public safety, health, convenience, comfort, prosperity or general welfare. 1-3 Section 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Lodi adopted its current General Plan in April of 2010. The General Plan is the City's vision for how to accommodate anticipated growth within the next 20 to 30 years. As part of the General Plan, the City reviews the forecasted traffic volumes based on the anticipated growth of the city. The number of lanes for each of the roads in the network is determined from these forecasts. A minimum Level of Service (LOS) "E" is maintained throughout the City. Chapter 5 of the General Plan designates Harney Lane as a four lane expressway from Lower Sacramento Road to State Route 99. To achieve this goal, the City proposes Harney Lane Specific Plan, which intends to refine the vision, goals, policies, and actions of the City's General Plan by establishing area -specific goals and policies to guide land use patterns in the Specific Plan Area (along Harney Lane). 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION The projects limits are located on Harney Lane, between Stockton Street and Lower Sacramento Road in the City of Lodi, in San Joaquin County. Harney Lane, as illustrated in Exhibit 1, is located at the southern edge of the current City limits. Regional access to the project limits is from SR Route 99 via Harney Lane exit. Exhibit 1 shows the project's location from a local and regional context. 2.3 PROJECT PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of the Harney Lane Specific Plan is to reach a consensus of the most appropriate roadway improvements to be implemented in the Harney Lane corridor to accommodate anticipated growth and traffic volume increases and establish the necessary right of way needed to be acquired, reserved and/or dedicated in order to accommodate the roadway improvements. Harney Lane is planned to be one of the main east -west connectors across the south side of the city. According to the General Plan, Harney Lane is classified as a minor arterial west of Lower Sacramento Road and an expressway from Lower Sacramento Road to State Route 99. Lower Sacramento Road is also designated an expressway (the main north -south connector on the west side of the city) connecting Harney Lane to Kettleman Lane 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves widening of Harney Lane so as to relieve existing and future traffic congestion at the west -east bound road. Harney Lane currently is a two lane road with a posted speed of 45 mph. North of Harney Lane is mostly new single family residential subdivisions with block walls fronting Harney Lane. Harney Lane has been widened to the ultimate width on the north where the recent development has occurred. The south side is a mixture of agriculture (grapes and cherries) and single family residences. West of Lower Sacramento Road single family 2-1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION residences populate both sides of the road. Between South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street, Harney Lane crosses the Union Pacific Railroad. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan mostly affects the south side of Harney Lane. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral component of the City's General Plan 2010, which identifies Harney Lane as a four lane express way. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan details roadway improvements, establish the necessary right- of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements and it affects a total of 47 privately -owned parcels. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. The project design, as illiterate in Exhibit 5, was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted on April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. There are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. 2-2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit 1: Location Map Vvoodbr�dga 11 a WootlBritlge Goff S fiawttry GiuG � �f..-., r t+iaedsridga Rd F ---- -W — i 1M1fQodliri(ige . �'` tii - WroOMM9e 1II ue L kr — 1Yimar — Tu 44mer-r - — _ y Ni Tr E- J -T ~I Aelerson P7ak�� —. _ �� I — — --' - I—: 4 = i ITLj r :rlri — w eawier �� = 3 — II I�Lpd�l - - �I I= J -1 E Realty Rd-'— F -*`I _ 1, :.;T _ i2 12 --E Y6aiUen�n`•,Ln'�,1N Keltl�man'iri�` Tn1L" --_ — .E Kaltirman Ln= - I f..'� �� I -= -rrl�- III I -- j�l�.--. • s U+1 HamTey Ln I .......... . .............. a,_......._ LIMITS OF HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC I I I :.-Armakrwy didmstrong Rd - — — iWk LOQiAI.:E-Ll.fi]alt=Rd- I.' 2-3 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit 2: Existing Land Use Diagram FIGURE 2-1: LAND USE DIAGRAM 0 Low Density Residential - Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial - Downtown Mixed Use Mixed Use Center - Mixed Use Corridor - Business Park 0 Office Public/Quasi-Public • College/School (Placeholder) 0 Industrial Open Space ® Armstrong Road Agricultural Cluster Study Area ---- Urban Reserve ------- Sphere of Influence (2008) --- City Limits (2008) 2-4 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit 3: Development Phases FBME3-1: Phase I Phase II Phase III Urban Reserve ....... Sphere of Influence (2068) City Limits (2008) 24 1 LODI CEAERAL PLAN 2-5 JOE.,, t no 1 114 yy ;-•r Mik ; i; l j / ;Ir ➢1.17...! 7G� JR F ... . r �.1 ------�- 'il lagoja J 1."Imm'��.� L�1=�� jl L p' .:5�, 'r rl:� - +{��.nll/17�,'~••� 1 .. k::-�Y61f�l�tirL':li{"_P`i>,� �?7aJrt ,. f+�I .�J-�'_� �'f sY'L•r,'��r'.:�.��I�}..�:r� 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-7 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit 5: Harney Lane Specific Plan Design —LxisriNa R/Y! �^•-- ' I,' a k.'::�- `r- -_� o, ,i l_~._:.: i i= _--anmas[a RIW HARN HARNEY LANE ' !- - + - •� _`i' ' L` ��_.- !`- k i jL'. A c •�_ � HARNEY LANE 24 II SYW � ' $ HARWY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN ] ""Ar rxor�s a roMr�xr, INC.CITY OF LODI �nc� av�rr PW 2.5 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Lodi, Public Works Department 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 9540 2.6 CONTACT PERSONS AND PHONE NUMBER: Environmental document: Project Coordinators: 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Manny Bereket 209-333-6711 Wes Fujitani 209-333-6706 Chris Boyer 209-333-6706 2.7 PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Lodi Public Works Department 221 W. Pine Street Lodi CA 95240 2.8 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The parcels fronting on north side of Harney Lane (within incorporated City limits) have a mixture of General Plan designations of Industrial, Commercial, Single Family Residence, Medium Density Residences, and High Density Residences. The parcels fronting on the south side of Harney Lane are within the San Joaquin County jurisdiction and have a General Plan Designation of Ag (Agricultural Land) and R/VL - Residential. 2.9 ZONING DESIGNATIONS: The parcels fronting on north side of Harney Lane (within incorporated City limits) have a mixture of Zoning designations of M-2, Heavy Industrial, C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, R-2, Single Family Residence, and PD- Planned Development Units. The parcels fronting on the south side of Harney Lane are within the San Joaquin County jurisdiction and have a variety of Zoning Designations of Ag -40 (Agricultural Land - minimum of 40 acres) and R/ VL - Residential. 2.10 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves widening of Harney Lane so as to relieve existing and future traffic congestion at the west -east bound road. Harney Lane currently is a two lane road with a posted speed of 45 mph. North of Harney Lane is mostly new single family residential subdivisions with block walls fronting Harney Lane. Harney Lane has been widened to the ultimate width on the north where the recent development has occurred. The south side is a mixture of agriculture (grapes and cherries) and single family residences. West of Lower Sacramento Road single family residences populate both sides of the road. Between South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street, Harney Lane crosses the Union 2-9 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Pacific Railroad. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan mostly affects the south side of Harney Lane. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral component of the City's General Plan 2010, which identifies Harney Lane as a four lane express way. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan details roadway improvements, establish the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements and it affects a total of 47 privately -owned parcels. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. The project design, as illiterate in Exhibit 5, was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted on April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. There are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. 2.11 REQUIRED PROJECT APPROVALS In order for the project to be implemented, a series of actions and approvals would be required from agencies. Anticipated project approvals/ actions would include, but are not limited to the following: • Lodi City Council - Adoption of the circulated ND, and actions associated with Harney Lane Specific Plan. 2.12 OTHER PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS This IS/ND assumes compliance with all applicable state, federal, and local codes and regulations including, but not limited to, City of Lodi Standards, the Guidance Manual for On-site Storm Water Quality Control Measures, the State Health and Safety Code, and the State Public Resources Code. 2.13 TECHNICAL STUDIES The following technical study forms the basis of this IS/ ND: • Draft Harney Lane Specific Plan, dated January 10, 2011. Prepared by Mark Thomas and Company, Inc., 2-10 Section 3 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources E] Geology/Soils ElElHazards & Hazardous Hydrology/Water Materials Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/ Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/ Services Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 3.2 ENVIRONEMNTAL DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measure based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Konradt Bartlam, Community Development Director Date 3-1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY Notice is herby given that the City of Lodi, Community Development Department, has completed an initial study and proposed a Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the project described below. The initial study prepared by the City was undertaken for the purpose of determining whether the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the initial study, Community Development Department staff has concluded that the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore has prepared a proposed Negative Declaration 11 -MND - 01. The initial study reflects the independent judgment of the City. FILE NUMBER: 1I -ND -01 PROJECT TITLE: Harney Lane Specific Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves widening of Harney Lane so as to relieve existing and future traffic congestion at the west -east bound road. Harney Lane currently is a two lane road with a posted speed of 45 mph. North of Harney Lane is mostly new single family residential subdivisions with block walls fronting Harney Lane. Harney Lane has been widened to the ultimate width on the north where the recent development has occurred. The south side is a mixture of agriculture (grapes and cherries) and single family residences. West of Lower Sacramento Road single family residences populate both sides of the road. Between South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street, Harney Lane crosses the Union Pacific Railroad. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan mostly affects the south side of Harney Lane. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral component of the City's General Plan 2010, which identifies Harney Lane as a four lane express way. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan details roadway improvements, establish the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements and it affects a total of 47 privately -owned parcels. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. The project design, as illiterate in Exhibit 5, was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted on April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. There are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. PROJECT LOCATION: The projects limits are located on Harney Lane, between Stockton Street and Lower Sacramento Road in the City of Lodi, in San Joaquin County. Harney Lane, 3-2 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION as illustrated in Exhibit 1, is located at the southern edge of the current City limits. Regional access to the project limits is from SR Route 99 via Harney Lane exit. Exhibit 1 shows the project's location from a local and regional context. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: The proposed Negative Declaration will be circulated for a 30 - day public review period, beginning on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 and ending on Wednesday, May 11, 2011. Copies of the document are available for review at the following locations: • Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240 • Lodi Public Library, 201 West Locust Street, Lodi, CA 95240 • Public Works Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240 The Mitigated Negative Declaration is also available for review on the internet at the following web address: http://www.lodi.gov/com dev/EIRs.html Any person wishing to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration must submit such comments in writing no later than 5:00 pm on Wednesday May 11, 2011to the City of Lodi at the following address: Community Development Director City of Lodi P. O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 Facsimiles at (209) 333-6842 will also be accepted up to the comment deadline (please mail the original). For further information, contact Immanuel Bereket, Associate Planner, at (209)333-6711. Konradt Bartlam, Community Development Director City of Lodi P. O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 The City will provide additional public notices when the public hearings have been scheduled to consider approval of the proposed Negative Declaration and the other entitlements for the project. Konradt Bartlam, Community Development Director Date 3-3 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Prepared pursuant to City of Lodi Environmental Guidelines, §§ 1.7 (c), 5.5 FILE NUMBER: 11 -MND -01 PROJECT TITLE: Harney Lane Specific Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves widening of Harney Lane so as to relieve existing and future traffic congestion at the west -east bound road. Harney Lane currently is a two lane road with a posted speed of 45 mph. North of Harney Lane is mostly new single family residential subdivisions with block walls fronting Harney Lane. Harney Lane has been widened to the ultimate width on the north where the recent development has occurred. The south side is a mixture of agriculture (grapes and cherries) and single family residences. West of Lower Sacramento Road single family residences populate both sides of the road. Between South Hutchins Street and South Stockton Street, Harney Lane crosses the Union Pacific Railroad. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan mostly affects the south side of Harney Lane. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral component of the City's General Plan 2010, which identifies Harney Lane as a four lane express way. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan details roadway improvements, establish the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements and it affects a total of 47 privately -owned parcels. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. The project design, as illiterate in Exhibit 5, was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted on April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. There are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. PROJECT LOCATION: The projects limits are located on Harney Lane, between Stockton Street and Lower Sacramento Road in the City of Lodi, in San Joaquin County. Harney Lane, as illustrated in Exhibit 1, is located at the southern edge of the current City limits. Regional access to the project limits is from SR Route 99 via Harney Lane exit. Exhibit 1 shows the project's location from a local and regional context. NAME OF PROJECT PROPONENT/APPLICANT: City of Lodi, Public Works Department 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 3-4 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A copy of the Initial Study ("Environmental Information Form' and "Environment Checklist") documenting the reasons to support the adoption of a Negative Declaration is available at the City of Lodi Community Development Department. Mitigation measures are ❑x are not ❑included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects on the environment. The public review on the proposed Negative Declaration will commence on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 and ending on Wednesday, May 11, 2011. The City will provide additional public notices when the public hearings have been scheduled to consider approval of the Negative Declaration. Konradt Bartlam, Community Development Director Date 3-5 Section 4 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST PotentiallLess Than Less -Than - Significant With Sinificant No Issues Significant Mg itigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.1 AESTHETICS. Mould the Project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? As indicated in the project description, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral part of the City's General Plan 2010 and involves establishment of the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Impact Analysis: (a) Determination of significance for potential impacts to visual resources is based primarily on the level of visual sensitivity in an area. Scenic vistas typically consist of a far reaching view, such as a panoramic view of a skyline or ridgeline, and provide an aesthetic public benefit (i.e. available to the general public). All roads nationally designated as such are considered part of America's Byways collection and must possess at least one of these six intrinsic qualities: historic, cultural, natural, scenic, recreational, and/or archaeological. To receive an All-American Road designation, a road must possess multiple intrinsic qualities that are nationally significant and contain one -of -a - kind features that do not exist elsewhere. The road must also be considered a "destination unto itself," and must provide an exceptional travel experience. (http://www.scenic.or /g_byways). The San Joaquin County General Plan and the City of Lodi General Plan do not designate specific areas within the Project site as scenic vistas, and the views from the project site consist of agricultural lands to the south and existing residential and commercial developments to the north, and ornamental landscaping. The topography in the project area is generally flat and does not support far reaching views. Further, the Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction, site grading, and disturbing. 4-1 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Future construction project would be viewed for potential environmental impact on project basis. Therefore, no impact would occur in this regard. Significance Determination: No impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required. Significance After Mitigation: No impact. (b) The Harney Lane Specific Plan would not affect a scenic vista or scenic resources scenic the project does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. No state scenic highways are located within the project area at this time and none of the local roads within the project area have been designated as scenic (State Routes 12 and 99 are not designated as scenic within or abutting the project area). Therefore, no impact would result associated with scenic resources visible from a designated scenic highway. Significance Determination: No impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required. Significance After Mitigation: No impact. (c) A project is generally considered to have a significant aesthetic impact if the project substantially changes the character of the project site such that it becomes visually incompatible in comparison to that of its surroundings. The project site is located within a partially urbanized area of the City and mostly agricultural land within the County. The project site consists of an existing roadway, surrounded by residential and commercial development. The project site and the surrounding area are not recognized as scenic resources or contain structures that have unique architectural styles or historical significance. Further, Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required. Significance After Mitigation: No impact. (d) Currently, the primary source of day and nighttime lighting and glare in the area is from Harney Lane and urban development around the project site. The main sources of daytime glare in the area are from sunlight reflecting from structures with reflective surfaces such as windows. Building materials (i.e., reflective glass and polished surfaces) are the most substantial sources of glare. The amount of glare depends on the intensity and direction of sunlight, which is more acute at sunrise and sunset because the angle of the sun is lower during these times. Nighttime light sources include, but are not limited to, residential developments, vehicles (headlights), overhead street lighting, parking lot lighting, and security related lighting for non-residential uses. Implementation of Harney Lane Specific Plan would require the replacement existing streetlights and installation of new streetlights. However, new streetlights would be controlled through the existing City Code, which requires street lights to be directed 4-2 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST down and shielded away from adjacent properties (Chapter 16.24). Nuisance lighting is regulated by the Municipal Code § 17.81.050. Nevertheless, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not propose construction plans or installation of streetlights. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required. Significance After Mitigation: No impact. 4-3 Issues 4.2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. lYlould the Pr ject. 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Significant Significant Significant No With N idgadon Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ use, or a Williamson Act contract? C. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ rezoning of forest land (as defined in PRC Sec. 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined in PRC Sec. 51104 (g)? d. Result in loss of forest land or conversion of ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ forest land to non -forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? The project occurs partially in agricultural fields and partially in fully developed urban area that does not contain any agricultural farmland. No parts of the project limits include forest uses. As indicated in the project description, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral part of the City's General Plan 2010 and involves establishment of the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements. Proposed right-of-way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. (a) Agriculture has historically been an important part of Lodi s land use and economy. Impacts resulting from conversion of important farmland, including conversions for transportation improvements, were considered and analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR (2009). In addition, the City's General Plan policies C -P7 and C -P8 involve mitigation measures aimed for the preservation of agricultural land and activities. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an implementing arm of the said General Plan and involves no construction activities. Future construction projects would be subjected 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Because the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, the project would have no impact from conversion of farmland. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, no impact would occur due to the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project were to result in the conversion of forest land to non -forest land. There is no existing zoning for forest land on or near the project limits. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, no impact would occur due to the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project were to result in the conversion of forest land to non -forest land. There is no forest land located in or around the project limits; therefore no impact to these resources would occur. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) A significant impact may occur if it involves changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, 4-5 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, no impact would occur due to the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact ER 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Issues Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.3 AIR QUALITY. Wlould the Project.• a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ substantially to an existing or Projected air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ substantial number of people? (a) The Federal Clean Air Act established Federal air quality standards known as the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. These standards identify levels of air quality for "criteria" pollutants (Ozone [03], Carbon Monoxide [CO], Nitrogen Oxides [NOX], Sulfur Oxides [SOX], Particulate Matter [PM1o], Fine Particulate Matter [PM2.5]:, and Lead [Pb]) that are considered the maximum levels of ambient (background) air pollutants considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. The City of Lodi is located in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). Air quality conditions within the SJVAB are under the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). SJVAPCD does not require construction emissions to be quantified. Rather, it requires implementation of effective and comprehensive feasible control measures to reduce PM10 emissions (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002). SJVAPCD considers PM10 emissions to be the greatest pollutant of concern when assessing construction -related air quality impacts. It has determined that compliance with its Regulation VIII, including implementation of all feasible control measures specified in its Guide for Assessing Air Quality Impacts (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002) constitutes sufficient mitigation to reduce construction -related PM10 emissions to less -than -significant levels and minimize adverse air quality effects. 4-7 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. Air Quality impacts have been exhaustively examined and mitigation measures have been detailed in the City's General Plan EIR (SCH2O09022075) and mitigation polices are incorporated in the General Plan policy. Future projects and developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, no impact would occur due to the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. 1. The project would not result in short-term construction emissions that would exceed the CEQA significance emissions thresholds established by the SJVAPCD and there would be no long-term emissions associated with the project as it involves no construction activities. 2. The project would not affect growth forecasts in the Air Quality Management Plan, since it does not propose physical improvements or construction activities. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) As aforementioned in item (a), the proposed project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation since it does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. All future projects including, but not limited to, Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Site Plan Review, and Planned Development Review projects must be evaluated to ensure compliance with air quality standards, including construction, area source, and operational emissions. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) As discussed in checklist item 4.3(a) and(b), the project will not significantly increase the production of any criteria pollutant as described in section a), therefore, it is appropriate to conclude that the project's incremental contribution to criteria pollutant emissions is not cumulatively considerable. Future construction activities will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) When quantifying mass emissions for localized analysis, only emissions that occur on- site are considered. Consistent with SJVAPCD Localized Significance Threshold (LST) methodology guidelines, emissions related to off-site delivery/haul truck activity and employee trips are not considered in the evaluation of localized impacts. As such, 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST localized impacts that may result from Harney Lane Specific Plan would be of no consequences as there no construction activity is being proposed at this time. Sensitive receptors near the project site include the nearby residences located along north of Harney Lane and interspersed along the south side of Harney Lane, and commercial properties along Harney Lane. However, as previously mentioned, The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. Air Quality impacts have been exhaustively examined and mitigation measures have been detailed in the City's General Plan EIR (SCH2O09022075) and mitigation polices are incorporated in the General Plan policy. Future projects and developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed any of the established air quality thresholds. There will be no impacts resulting from the proposed project and would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) According to the SJVAPCD Guide For Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by SJVAPCD as being associated with odors. Further, no construction activities or materials are proposed that would as part of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. As such, no potential odor impacts are anticipated due to the project. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant Significant No With Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Mould the Project.• a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Since the adoption of AB 32, there has been little regulatory guidance regarding quantification of potential greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts. Given the complexity of the overall interactions between various global and regional scale air emissions, it is difficult to determine whether any proposed project would alter any existing conditions. No statewide significance threshold has been adopted. Although the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has adopted interim guidance on GHG analysis, this guidance only applies to stationary sources. The recently revised CEQA Guidelines indicate that the lead agency should use careful judgment in assessing potential GHG impacts. Pursuant to the Guidelines, the lead agency should make a good faith effort to describe a project's potential GHG emissions. The lead agency may, in its discretion, rely on a quantitative or qualitative analysis for these purposes (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.4(a)) (a) California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases (GHG's), emitting over 400 million tons of CO2 a year. Climate studies indicate that California is likely to see an increase of three to four degrees Fahrenheit over the next century. Methane is also an important GHG that potentially contributes to global climate change. GHG's are global in their effect, which is to increase the earth's ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere. As primary GHG's have a long lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally well -mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. The impact of anthropogenic activities on global climate change is apparent in the observational record. Air trapped by ice has been extracted from core samples taken from polar ice sheets to determine the global atmospheric variation of CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide from before the start of the industrialization (approximately 1750), to over 650,000 years ago. For that period, it was found that CO2 concentrations ranged from 180 parts per million (ppm) to 300 ppm. For the period from approximately 1750 to the present, global CO2 concentrations increased from a pre -industrialization period concentration of 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005, with the 2005 value far exceeding the upper end of the pre -industrial period range. 4-10 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) constructed several emission trajectories of GHG's needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. It concluded that a stabilization of GHG's at 400 to 450 ppm carbon dioxide - equivalent concentration is required to keep mean global climate change below 2"C, which in turn is assumed to be necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. City of Lodi Greenhouse Gas Emissions In accordance with Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) 2006 and Senate Bill (SB 97) 2007, the City of Lodi is implementing a policy that requires Negative Declarations, Mitigated Negative Declarations and Environmental Impact Reports prepared to comply with CEQA to include a GHG Emissions analysis. The adverse impacts of global climate change include impacts to water supply, air quality, fire hazards, sea level rise (flooding), and an increase in health related problems. AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 level by the year 2020. The long range reduction goal is reflected in Executive Order S-3-05, which requires GHG to be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. When dealing with air quality issues related to operation emissions, thresholds are usually compared to the net change in emissions compared to baseline conditions (normally existing conditions with no Project). In addition, there are currently no health - based standards that measure the threat GHGs, including CO2, pose on human health. In comparison to existing conditions, implementation of the proposed Harney Lane Specific plan would not increase vehicle emissions generated by mobile source as well as emissions generated by stationary sources because it does not propose physical improvements or construction activities. The City's General Plan is consistent with the State's goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and is consistent with the City of Lodi General Plan 2010 and accompanying EIR. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) As stated previously, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with applicable regional or local plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The proposed Project would be consistent with the State's goals of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. As such, the proposed Project's contribution to climate change/ worldwide GHG emissions would be less than significant. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-11 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Potentially Less -Than - Si ficant With No Issues Significant Significant Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES mould the proposal.• a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either ❑ directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? £ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ❑ Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ■ 19 0 J ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ *■�E 0 ■ ■ (a) No impacts to biological resources are expected as a result of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. All future constructions plans would by reviewed for environmental impact on project -by -project basis. Further, the Project area is within and consistent with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), as amended, as reflected in the conditions of project approval for this proposal. Pursuant to the Final EIR/EIS for the San Joaquin county Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), dated November 15, 2000, and certified by the San Joaquin Council of Governments on December 7, 2000, implementation of the SJMSCP is expected to reduce impacts to biological resources resulting from the proposed project to 4-12 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST a level of less -than -significant. That document is hereby incorporated by reference and is available for review during regular business hours at the San Joaquin Council of Governments (555 East Weber Avenue/ Stockton, CA 95202) or online at www.sjcog.org. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. Impacts to Biological Resources have been exhaustively examined and mitigation measures have been detailed in the City's General Plan EIR (SCH #2009022075) and mitigation polices are incorporated in the General Plan policy. All future projects and developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if wetlands that are protected under federal regulation, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, would be modified or removed. No construction activities have been proposed as part of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project interferes or removes access to a migratory wildlife corridor or impedes the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The area north of the Project site lies within the City of Lodi and is currently developed. The area east, south and west is currently agricultural fields. Given the existing development north of the site and regular disturbance associated with agricultural uses, it is unlikely that the site would serve as a migratory corridor or a nursery site. Furthermore, the project area where the Harney Lane Specific Plan would be implemented is not identified as a missing linkage on the California Wilderness Coalition California's Missing Linkages Report. Therefore, no impact is anticipated due to the implementation of the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project would cause an impact that was inconsistent with local regulations pertaining to biological resources, including protected trees. There are no locally designated natural communities within or adjacent to the project area, and the proposed project would not result in the removal of any 4-13 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST heritage trees. Further, the City of Lodi General Plan (Conservation Element) includes goals and policies intended to protect sensitive native vegetation and wildlife habitats. The proposed project would not result in the removal of any heritage trees. Thus, no impact would result. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project were inconsistent with mapping or policies in any conservation plans of the types cited. In an effort to protect sensitive and threatened species throughout San Joaquin County, SJCOG prepared the SJMSCP. The purpose of the SJMSCP is to provide for the long-term management of plant, fish and wildlife species, specially those that are currently listed or may be listed in the future under the FESA or CESA, and to provide and maintain multiple -use open space that contributes to the quality of life of residents of San Joaquin County. The City of Lodi has adopted the SJMSCP and participation by the Project in the plan is required by the City. The proposed project is consistent with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), as amended, as reflected in the conditions of project approval for this proposal. Pursuant to the Final EIR/EIS for the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), dated November 15, 2000, and certified by the San Joaquin Council of Governments on December 7, 2000, implementation of the SJMSCP is expected to reduce impacts to biological resources resulting from the proposed project to a level of less -than - significant. That document is hereby incorporated by reference and is available for review during regular business hours at the San Joaquin Council of Governments (555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202) or online at: ww.sicoq.orq. Significance Determination: No Impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-14 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project. - a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ paleontological resource or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries. (a) A significant impact would occur if the Project caused a substantial adverse change to a historical resource through demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the historical resource would be materially impaired. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not include construction, grading, and site disturbance. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on historical resources as defined by CEQA Significance Determination: Less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact would occur if the Project caused a substantial adverse change to a historical resource through demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the historical resource would be materially impaired. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction, grading, and site disturbance. All future construction activities would be evaluated for adverse environmental impact on project -by -project basis. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on historical resources as defined by CEQA Significance Determination: Less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if grading or excavation activities associated with the proposed Project would disturb paleontological resources or geologic features that exist within the Project site. No paleontological resources or unique geologic features have been noted on the surface of the Project site. The likelihood of paleontological resources or unique geologic features being present subsurface within the boundaries of the 4-15 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST proposed Project is unlikely given the rapid rate of deposition in the area. The possibility exists, however, that previously unidentified paleontological resources could be encountered during ground -disturbing activities. All future ground disturbing activities would be evaluated on project -by -project basis for environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would lead to less than significant impact. Significance Determination: Less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if grading or excavation activities associated with the proposed Project would disturb previously interred human remains. Disturbing human remains, either in a formal cemetery or disarticulated, would be considered a significant impact under CEQA Guidelines §10564.5. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not include construction, grading, and site disturbance. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on historical resources as defined by CEQA. Significance Determination: Less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-16 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (a) d. Be located on expansive soils, as defined in ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Table 18-1-13 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? i. A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project resulted in or exposed people to adverse effects involving fault rupture, such as from placement of structures or infrastructure within a state -designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or other designated fault zone. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving surface rupture as the Project involves no construction activities. No impact. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-17 Less Than potentially Significant Less -Than- No Issues Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Wlould the Project.• a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ liquefaction? iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ b. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ topsoil? C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on -or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (a) d. Be located on expansive soils, as defined in ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Table 18-1-13 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? i. A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project resulted in or exposed people to adverse effects involving fault rupture, such as from placement of structures or infrastructure within a state -designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or other designated fault zone. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving surface rupture as the Project involves no construction activities. No impact. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-17 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ii. A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project results in or exposes people to adverse effects involving strong ground shaking from fault rupture or seismic hazards. There is no record of any seismic activity originating in the City of Lodi other than tremors on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, close to the Ortigalita Fault. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving surface rupture as the Project involves no construction activities. No impact. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact. iii. A significant impact may occur if the Project were to result in or expose people to adverse effects involving seismic -related ground failure from liquefaction and other geologic hazards. Liquefaction is a form of earthquake -induced ground failure that occurs primarily in relatively shallow, loose, granular, water -saturated soils. The potential for liquefaction is recognized throughout the San Joaquin Valley where unconsolidated sediments and a high water table coincide. Areas which have the greatest potential for liquefaction are those areas in which the water table is less than 50 feet below the ground surface and soils are predominantly clean, comprised of relatively uniform sands and are of loose to medium density. However, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving surface rupture as the Project involves no construction activities. No impact. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact. iv. A significant impact may occur if the Project results in or exposes people to adverse effects involving landslides. Slope stability hazards are nonexistent and present no risk in the City of Lodi. The Project site is located in an area of generally level terrain that would not produce a landslide. Average grade within the Project site is between zero and five degrees. Further, according to the Official Maps of Seismic Hazard Zones provided by the State of California Department of Conservation, the Project site is not located within an earthquake -induced landslide zone, which is defined as an area where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact. (b) The project site would be subject to seismic ground shaking, as is the case throughout seismically active California. Ground shaking may occur as result of movement along 4-18 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST any fault in northern California. However, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities or improvements. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) The project is an implementing arm of the City General Plan and does not propose any physical improvements or construction activities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) See discussion under a) above. Potential impacts are highly unlikely and are considered to be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are necessary to support the Proposed Project. Therefore, no impact would occur and no mitigation is required. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-19 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a Project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? f. For a Project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ airstrip, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 4-20 potentially Less Than Si significant With � Less -Than - No Issues Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Vould the Project.• a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a Project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? f. For a Project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ airstrip, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 4-20 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project involves the use or disposal of hazardous materials as part of its routine operations and has the potential to generate toxic or otherwise hazardous emissions. The proposed project involves adoption of a street widening plan and not the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or the generation of toxic or hazardous emissions. In addition, the project involves no construction activities. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project uses substantial amounts of hazardous materials as part of routine operations, which could pose a hazard under accident or upset conditions. The operation of the roadway does not involve the use of hazardous materials. Vehicles carrying hazardous materials may use the roadway. Nonetheless, the proposed project would not increase the potential for accidents or spills beyond existing conditions. Furthermore, improvements in traffic flow may reduce the potential for accidents overall; therefore, no impacts would occur. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is located within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school site and projected to release toxic emissions that pose a hazard beyond regulatory thresholds. There several private and public schools within a 1/2 mile of the project area. However, the project does not involve construction activities and does not involve. The use of hazardous materials or result in the release of hazardous materials or substances. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project site contains hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires state agencies to compile lists of hazardous waste disposal facilities, unauthorized releases from underground storage tanks, contaminated drinking water wells, and solid waste facilities from which there is known hazardous waste and submit such information to the Secretary for Environmental Protection on at least an annual basis. There are two sites identified as hazardous material sites within the project area. However, the Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. All future construction activities would be subject to standard City procedures and other applicable State and Federal procedures and requirements. 4-21 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project site is located within a public airport land use plan area or within 2 miles of a public airport and would create a safety hazard. The Project site is located with the area of influence for the Lodi Airpark and Kingdon Executive Airport. The Lodi Airpark is located roughly 4 miles to the southwest of the Project site while the Kingdon Executive Airport is located approximately 4 miles southwest of the Project site. The primary function of the Lodi Airpark is as a base for a commercial aerial chemical application service for both agriculture and insect abatement purposes. The Lodi Airpark is also used for pilot training activity. The Kingdon Executive Airport presently hosts a variety of aviation activities including pilot training and aerial application of agricultural chemicals. The airport is also home to the Delta Flying Club, which owns six single-engine piston aircraft for use by its members. The Project site is located outside of the Part 77 Horizontal Surface zone of both airports, which consists of the airport's primary, horizontal, conical, approach and transitional surfaces. Therefore, impacts related to safety hazards for people visiting or working within the Project site would be less than significant. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project is located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and creates a safety hazard for people in the Project area. The Project site is located outside of the Part 77 Horizontal Surface zone of both airports, which consists of the airport's primary, horizontal, conical, approach and transitional surfaces. Therefore, impacts related to safety hazards for people visiting or working within the Project site would be less than significant. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (g) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project were to interfere with roadway operations occurring in conjunction with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan or generate enough traffic to create traffic congestion that would interfere with the execution of such a plan. The Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. All construction -related activities would be contained within and immediately around the Project site. Road closures are not anticipated during construction activities; however, in the event that a closure is 4-22 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST necessary standard contractor specifications imposed by the City include a requirement to ensure that roadways surrounding the Project site remain accessible to emergency vehicles and crews, and open for emergency evacuations, if necessary. The City has an Emergency Management Plan that addresses the campus community's planned response for various levels of emergencies, including fires, hazardous spills, earthquakes, flooding, and explosions Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project is located in or adjacent to a wildland area and places persons or structures at risk in the event of a fire. The City's newly adopted General Plan (2010) identifies both urban and wildland fire hazards exist in the Lodi Planning Area, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commercial, and/or industrial structures due to human activities. Factors that exacerbate urban structural fires include substandard building construction, highly flammable materials, delayed response times, and inadequate fire protection services. The City of Lodi is not characterized by substantial areas of wildlands. The topography of the City is relatively homogenous and steep slopes that could contribute to wildland fires are not common. The City's General Plan indicates that less than one percent of the City and its immediate vicinity has "Moderate' fire hazard potential. In the event of a fire, the Fire Department relies on sufficient water supply and pressure. The City's design standard for water transmission facilities is to provide 4,000 gallons per minute of flow at a minimum 45 pounds per square inch of pressure in pipes 8 inches and larger. The Project area is made up of Non-Wildland/Non-Urban zones, Urban/Unzoned, and Moderate Risk zones. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildland fires are adjacent to urbanized areas. As such, there would be no impact. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-23 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Issues potentially Less Than Less - Than -significant With No Significantsignificant Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY mould the Project.• a. Violate any water quality standards or waste ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ 4-24 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project discharges water that does not meet the water quality standards set by agencies that regulate surface water quality and water discharge into stormwater drainage systems. The Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve physical improvements or construction activities. Future construction activities and projects would be reviewed project -by - project basis. Although implementation of the proposed Project would increase impermeable surface area, and site runoff, potentially contributing typical roadway pollutants to the environment, future developments within the Project area would be required to conform to surface water quality standards adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and enforced by the City of Lodi. These standards mandate installation of either biological or mechanical methods of treating and cleansing stormwater runoff prior to entering the City and regional drainage system, or equivalent water quality features. With adherence to these requirements, this impact would be less - than -significant. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) Groundwater is a major component of the water supply for many public water suppliers in the Valley. It is also used by private industry, as well as by private agricultural and domestic users. A project would normally have a significant impact on groundwater supplies if it were to result in a demonstrable and sustained reduction in groundwater recharge capacity or change the potable water levels enough to reduce the ability of a water utility to use the groundwater basin for public water supplies or the storage of imported water, reduce the yields of adjacent wells or well fields, or adversely change the rate or direction of groundwater flow. The Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. All future construction activities would be subjected to environmental review on project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in a substantial alteration of drainage patterns and a substantial increase in erosion or siltation during construction or operation of the project. The Project site does not contain any discernable watercourses, topographical depressions, or bodies of standing water. No streams or river courses are located on or immediately adjacent to the project site. As such, no impact would occur that would affect a nearby stream or river or the existing drainage pattern on or near the proposed project site. 4-25 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) Refer to c), above. The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in increased runoff volumes during construction or operation and flooding conditions that affect the project site or nearby properties. The Harney Lane Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves adoption of a road widening policy. Implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan would result in conditions similar to existing, and would not propose any new uses that would potentially degrade water quality. All future construction activates would be subject to environmental review on project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if a project includes potential sources of water pollutants with the potential to substantially degrade water quality. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would neither create nor contribute to water quality degradation. Future construction activities would be required to comply with City of Lodi and Regional Water Quality Control Board surface water quality standards, including applicable NPDES requirements, which require contractors to take measures to prevent the pollution of channels, storm drains, and bodies of water during construction. As such, implementation of the proposed project would not create any new impacts related to water quality beyond those that already exist. Therefore, no impact related to water quality would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (g) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is located within a 100 -year flood zone. The proposed Project would not place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area identified on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map because the Project does not include a residential component that would be affected by flooding potential, so no impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant 4-26 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (h) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is located within a 100 -year flood zone and would impede or redirect flood flows. As discussed in Checklist Response 3.9 (G) above, the project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area. In addition, the proposed project would not include the construction of any structures. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (i) A significant impact may occur if the proposed Project is located in a flood -prone area, including floods caused by the failure of a dam or levee. The Project sites, as well as the entire City of Lodi, are located in a dam inundation area for the Pardee and Camanche Dam and dike system. Flood water from the Pardee dam would take 4 hours and 20 minutes to reach west Lodi, and flood water from the Camanche Dam and dike system would take 4 to 6 hours to reach Lodi. Due to the location of the proposed Project, the impacts associated with seiches, tsunami, and extreme high tides or sea level change would be considered low. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (j) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is located in an area with inundation potential due to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. A seiche is the tide -like rise and drop of water in a closed body of water caused by earthquake -induced seismic shaking or strong winds. A tsunami is a series of large waves generated by a strong offshore earthquake or volcanic eruption. Given the substantial distance of the Project site from San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean, tsunami waves would not be a threat to the site. There is no large body of water on or within the vicinity of the Project site. The subject area is flat and does not have any steep slopes or hillsides that would be susceptible to mudflows or landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-27 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Potentially Less Than Less -Than - Significant With No Issues Significant � Significant Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING. Wlould the Project.• a. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating on environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is sufficiently large enough or otherwise configured in such a way so as to create a physical barrier within an established community. The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves road a widening program and involves no construction activities. The Harney Lane Specific Plan would improve east -west mobility in the southern part of the City. As such, it would not create a physical barrier within an established community. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is inconsistent with general plan designations or zoning currently applicable to the proposed project site and causes adverse environmental effects, which the general plan and zoning ordinance are designed to avoid or mitigate. The purpose of this Harney Lane Specific Plan is to reach a consensus of the most appropriate roadway improvements to be implemented in the Harney Lane corridor to accommodate anticipated growth and traffic volume increases and establish the necessary right of way needed to be acquired, reserved and/or dedicated in order to accommodate the roadway improvements. The Specific Plan was prepared in accordance with the City framework set out in the General Plan adopted April 7, 2010. Items considered during the preparation of the Specific Plan include future land use, roadway and bicycle network, right of way issues, safety (pedestrian and vehicular), ingress and egress for residents and businesses and environmental issues. There are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan 4-28 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project conflicts with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan adopted for the area surrounding the project location. As discussed in 3.10 (B) above, there are no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the Harney Lane Specific Plan. All future developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by - project basis. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-29 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant Significant No With Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES Wlould the Project.• a. Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project is located in an area that is used or available for extraction of a regionally important mineral resource, converts an existing or potential regionally important mineral extraction use to another use, or affects access to a site used or potentially available for regionally important mineral resource extraction. The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves a road widening program and no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the Harney Lane Specific Plan. All future developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if a project is located in an area that is used or available for extraction of a locally important mineral resource, as delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. As discussed in 3.11(A), no physical improvements or construction activities are proposed by the project itself at this time. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: No Impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-30 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significa t Significant With Significant No M tigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.12 NOISE Would the Project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ❑ levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient ❑ noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ❑ ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? e. For a Project located within an airport land use ❑ plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a Project within the vicinity of a private ❑ airstrip, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? ❑ ■ ❑ ■ ❑ ■ ❑ ■ FE -1 U ■ ■ El u (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project generates noise levels that exceed the standards for ambient noise, as established by the general plan and municipal code, and/or exposes persons or sensitive uses to increased noise levels. Noise -sensitive uses may include residences, transient lodging, schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, auditoriums, concert halls, amphitheatres, playgrounds, and parks. The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves a road widening program and involves no physical improvements or construction activities. All future developments within the project limits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the project results in or exposes people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels during construction or operation. This would include excessive groundborne vibration or noise that causes structural damage or displaces objects in nearby buildings. 4-31 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST As discussed in 2.12(A), no physical improvements or construction activities are proposed by the project itself at this time. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project were to result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the proposed project. The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves a road widening program and no physical improvements or construction activities proposed are by the Harney Lane Specific Plan. All future developments in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. In addition, noise levels in the project vicinity are dominated by vehicular traffic along Harney Lane and the nearby trains. This condition would continue after implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project is intended to reduce congestion. The Harney Lane Specific Plan is not growth -inducing. The resultant increase in traffic noise is estimated to be of a level that would not be readily noticeable to the typical human ear in the community environment (i.e., outside of controlled conditions). Therefore, the increase in traffic noise would be less than significant. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project were to result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above existing ambient noise levels without the proposed project. As discussed in 3.12(C), no physical improvements or construction activities proposed by the project itself at this time. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. As such, implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan would not substantially increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity over existing conditions. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-32 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (e) A significant impact may occur if the project is located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public airport and people residing or working in the project area would be exposed to excessive noise levels. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels generated by public use airports, or private airstrips. There is not an airport located within two (2) miles of the Project site. The closest airport to the Project site is the Lodi Airpark, located approximately four (4) miles southwest of the Project site, and supports twenty to thirty (20-30) operations per day. The airport's noise "footprint" does not extend beyond the immediate airport boundary. Therefore, the Project would have no impact from airport -generated noise. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if the project is located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and people residing or working in the project area would be exposed to excessive noise levels. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels generated by public use airports, or private airstrips. There is not an airport located within two (2) miles of the Project site. The closest airport to the Project site is the Lodi Airpark, located approximately four (4) miles southwest of the Project site, and supports twenty to thirty (20-30) operations per day. The airport's noise "footprint" does not extend beyond the immediate airport boundary. Therefore, the Project would have no impact from airport -generated noise. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-33 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Issues Potentially Sign ficantSignificant Impact Significantess Thn With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than- Impact No Impact 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the Pr lect.- a. Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project induces substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve the development of housing. The proposed project is General Plan policy program designed to mitigate anticipated traffic conditions. It would not induce population growth directly or indirectly. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project would result in the displacement of existing housing units, necessitating construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not induce population growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan involves infrastructure improvements along Harney Lane and would not displace existing housing in the area. No replacement housing would be required as a result of the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. No impacts would occur in this regard. Significance Determination: No impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-34 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in the displacement of a substantial number of people. Please refer to 3.13(B). The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not displace residents, and, therefore, no replacement housing would be required. As such, no impacts would occur. Significance Determination: No impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-35 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically alteredgovernmental facilities, need for new orphysically alteredgovernmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or otherperformance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ b. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ C. Schools? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ d. Parks? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ e. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ (a) A significant impact may occur if the City of Lodi Fire Department cannot adequately serve the proposed project based on response time, access, or fire hydrant/water availability. The City of Lodi Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency response to the City. The Lodi Fire Department operates out of four stations. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would occur within and along Harney Lane. The Harney Lane Specific Plan would not generate new residents or employees, and would not result in a demand of fire and emergency response services. Future construction activities would be reviewed on project -by -project basis to ensure compliance and consistency with the City's Safety policy. Implementation of the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would improve traffic flow and emergency access within the project area. Therefore, impacts are less than significant. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in an increase in demand for police services that would exceed the capacity of the police department responsible for serving the site. The City of Lodi Police Department provides police protection to the City. The main police station is located at 215 West Elm Street, approximately 3.25 miles north of the project site. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not include uses that would require additional police services or facilities. Long-term project operations would improve traffic flow and thus police access within the project area. Therefore, impacts are less than significant. 4-36 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project induces substantial employment or population growth, which could generate demand for school facilities that exceed the capacity of the school district responsible for serving the project site. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Program is a street -widening project intended to relieve existing and future traffic congestion. It would not induce growth, either directly or indirectly, and would not increase the demand for schools in the area through substantial employment or population growth. No impacts are anticipated related to population or employment growth; therefore, no impacts on enrollment levels at nearby schools would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the available parks and recreation services cannot accommodate the population increase resulting from implementation of the proposed project. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Program is a street -widening project intended to relieve existing and future traffic congestion. It would not induce growth, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, it would not increase the demand for parks in the area. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (e) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project generates demand for other public facilities, thereby exceeding the capacity available to serve the project site. The Project would not contribute significantly to the demand for any other public facilities (e.g., library, senior centers, or other public facilities/ services) as it would not directly introduce a new population of residents to the City. Some minor incidental demand for services may result, as such impacts would be less than significant on a Project -specific or cumulative basis. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-37 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.15 RECREATION a. Would the Project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the Project include recreational facilities ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project includes substantial employment or population growth, which could generate demands for public parks and recreational facilities that exceed the capacity of those that currently exist. As discussed previously, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not directly or indirectly induce growth. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or any other recreation facilities. The proposed project would have no impact on neighborhood or regional parks. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project includes the construction or expansion of recreational facilities or necessitates the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not include recreational component. The proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities or induce growth, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, it would not increase the demand for recreational facilities in the area. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-38 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Issues potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Wlould the Project.• a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project causes an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would widen Harney Lane between State Highway 99 and Lower Sacramento Road in order to reduce congestion and increase sidewalk widths to improve pedestrian access. No additional vehicle trips would be generated by the proposed project. The project is designed to ease existing congestion in the area and to provide additional capacity for the future developments. No major shift in traffic is expected as a result of the street improvements. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-39 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project exceeds, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the San Joaquin Council of Governments, the county congestion management agency, for designated roads or highways. Please refer to 3.11(A). The purpose of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) is to develop a coordinated approach to managing and decreasing traffic congestion by linking the various transportation, land use, and air quality planning programs throughout the County. The CMP program required review of substantial individual projects, which might individually impact the CMP transportation system. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not generate any new daily trips. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would widen the existing roadway and add additional travel lanes, which would improve traffic flow. The project aims to reduce congestion and, as such, would help maintain an acceptable level of service (LOS) along the affected portion of Harney Lane. Therefore, less than significant impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project changes air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. There are no airports located within or adjacent to the project limits. The proposed project does not include any aviation -related elements and would not change existing air traffic patterns. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project substantially increases road hazards due to a design feature or introduced incompatible uses. The proposed project would not increase road hazards due to a design feature or introduce incompatible uses. The Harney Lane Specific Plan involves reservation and acquisition of right-of-ways for future road widening and proposes no physical improvements or construction activities. The proposed project would incorporate design features to improve circulation, reduce congestion, and increase safety along Harney Lane. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-40 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (e) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in inadequate emergency access. The proposed project consists of the widening of Harney Lane to improve traffic flow and reduce traffic congestion. These improved conditions could enhance emergency access to the surrounding area. Therefore, no impact related to inadequate emergency access would occur. Significance Determination: No impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project results in inadequate parking capacity based upon City code requirements. Construction activities may temporarily reduce available on -street parking in the project area. Impacts on parking during construction would be temporary and, once completed, the project would not result in a net loss of parking, and may even increase parking capacity. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (g) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. The proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impact would occur. Significance Determination: Less than significant impact Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-41 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the Project. - a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the Project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ treatment provider which serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project's Projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ and regulations related to solid waste? (a) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project exceeds wastewater treatment requirements of the regional water quality control board, the local regulatory governing agency. As indicated in the project description, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan is an integral part of the City's General Plan 2010 and involves establishment of the necessary right-of-way required to accommodate the roadway improvements. Proposed right-of- way acquisitions would occur in conjunction with actual construction projects in the future. No physical improvements or construction activities are proposed in conjunction with implementation of the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by - project basis. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur 4-42 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (b) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project requires construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. The project would not require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. In addition, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan would not use water in amounts that would have a significant impact on water treatment facilities. The minimal amounts of water used during construction and for irrigation of landscaping would be accommodated by existing water supplies. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (c) A significant impact may occur if the volume of stormwater runoff from the proposed project increases to a level exceeding the capacity of the storm drain system serving the project site. New storm drainage facilities would be constructed as part of the proposed project as part of future projects. Each project would be reviewed for potential environmental impact on project by project basis. The construction of all storm water drainage facilities required as part of the project would be subject to the requirements of the RWQCB and the NPDES permit process; therefore impacts are considered less than significant. No impact would result due to implementation of the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (d) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project would exceed the existing water supplies available to serve the project. The proposed project consists of improvements to an existing street and would not increase the use of water, except for irrigation of landscaping improvements. City policies encourage the use of drought tolerant trees whenever possible to minimize the use of water in the City. The project would not result in new facilities or other uses that would require additional water resources. As a result, existing water supplies would not be exceeded by the project. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-43 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (e) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project would increase wastewater generation to such a degree that the capacity of facilities currently serving the project site would be exceeded. The proposed project would not create new land uses that would result in wastewater generation that would affect the capacity of existing facilities or wastewater utility infrastructure. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (f) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project were to increase solid waste generation to a degree that existing and projected landfill capacities would be insufficient to accommodate the additional solid waste. The proposed project would not produce any solid waste during operations. Construction activities may generate minor amounts of solid waste (concrete, asphalt, etc.), but these small amounts would be recycled or disposed of in existing landfills. The amount could be accommodated by existing landfill capacity. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact (g) A significant impact may occur if the proposed project generates solid waste that is not disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. Disposal of all solid waste generated would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, no impact would occur. Significance Determination: No impact would occur Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures are not required Significance After Mitigation: No impact 4-44 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST potentially Less Than Less -Than - Issues Significant Significant With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 4.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the Project have the potential to degrade ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the Project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past Projects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects)? C. Does the Project have environmental effects ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant impact. As documented in this Initial Study, the proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan does not involve construction activities. The project will not substantially impact any scenic vistas, scenic resources, or the visual character of the area; the proposed project would not directly affect any sensitive habitat or wildlife populations. The project does not involve any operational component or construction impacts that could substantially degrade the quality of the environment, as discussed throughout this analysis. Subsequent development in the Plan Area, including all Subdivisions, Site Plan Reviews, Planned Development Review, and Conditional Use Permits will be subject to environmental review on a project -by -project basis. 4-45 Section 4 4.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. Less than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. The proposed Harney Lane Specific Plan also serves as an implementing arm of the City's General Plan 2010. Chapter 5 of the General Plan designates Harney Lane as a four lane expressway from Lower Sacramento Road to State Route 99. To achieve this goal, the City proposes Harney Lane Specific Plan, which intends to refine the vision, goals, policies, and actions of the City's General Plan by establishing area -specific goals and policies to guide land use patterns in the Specific Plan Area (along Harney Lane). All the individual and cumulative impacts have been analyzed in the Lodi General Plan EIR 2009 (SCH#2009022075). As such, less than significant impacts are anticipated with full implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Lodi General Plan EIR 2009 (SCH#2009022075). (c) Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than significant impact. The proposed project would not cause any significant environmental impacts, either short term or long term. The project is designed to alleviate traffic congestion and provide standard road widths within an established community. The proposed project would not result in any adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 4-46 Section 5 5.0 REFERENCES Documents Referenced • Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (http: www.consrv.ca. og v/dmg/shezp/maps/mora4.htln). • California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, as amended. • City of Lode General Plan 2010. • City of Lodi General Plan Environmental Impact Report 2009 (SCH#2009022075) • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map, Map Panel Number 06077C0169F, Effective Date October 16, 2009. • Guide For Assessing And Mitigating Air Quality Impacts., Prepared by San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Distrct. • State of California, Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Accessed at www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp • State of California, Health and Human Safety Code, Section 7050.5. • State of California, Public Resources Code, Section 5097.5. • United States, Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Wetlands Mapper, Accessed March 28, 2011. Available online at httl2://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html • United States, Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service. The National Map (created and maintained by U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey). • United States, Environmental Protection Agency, EnviroMapper for Superfund. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/enviro/sf/. 5-1 0 FOR Please immediately confirm receipt cf this fax by calling 333-6702 CITY OF LODI P.O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN REPORT AND CERTIFYING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, JUNE 18,2011 TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: LNS ACCT. #0510052 DATED: THURSDAY, JUNE 16,2011 ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK JENNIFER M. ROBISON, CMC ASSISTANT CITY CLERK forms\advins.doc RAND[ JOHL, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 I CERRA ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK DECLARATION OF POSTING PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN REPORTAND CERTIFYING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN On Thursday, June 16, 2011, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing to consider resolution approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan (attached and marked as ExhibitA) was posted at the following locations: Lodi Public Library Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 16, 2011 , at Lodi, California. JENNIFER M. ROBISON, CMC ASSISTANT CITY CLERK N:\Administration\CLERK\Forms\DECPOSTPW.DOC ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK f". ..-.( "/ 14 4 4A. M IA BECERRA ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK DECLARATION OF MAILING �IFOP`� PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN REPORT AND CERTIFYING HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HARNEY LANE SPECIFIC PLAN On Thursday, June 16, 2011, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing Notice of Public Hearing to consider resolution approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and certifying Harney Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for Harney Lane Specific Plan, attached hereto marked Exhibit A. The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit B. There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed. declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 16, 2011, at Lodi, California. JENNIFER M. ROBISON, CMC ASSISTANT CITY CLERK Forms/decmail.doc ORDERED BY: RANDIJOHL CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI ��LIA BECERR ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK • CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi Date: July 20,2011 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Randi Johl, City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE S HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, July 20, 2011, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter: a) Resolution approving Harney Lane Specific Plan Report and certifying the Hamey Lane Specific Plan Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for the Harney Lane Specific Plan. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Public Works Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6706. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 West Pine Street, 2nd Floor, Lodi, 95240, at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing. If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. ZBer of the Lodi City Council: I City Clerk Dated: June 15,2011 Amroved as to form: D. Stephen Schwabauer City Attorney N:Wdministration\CLERMPubHearWOTICES\NotPW doc CLERMPUBHEAR\NOTICEMNotPW.doc 6/9/11 1EXHIBIT BI Mailing list for Harney Lane Specific Plan Report (July 20, 2011) Abarca i Marvin and Maria 12543 Ivory Lane — — _ Lodi i CA 95242-4811 Aberle Steven ;712 McCoy Court, #66 LodCA 95240-7167 (Aguayo _ - Salvador !700 McCoy Court, #51 Lodi 1 CA � 95240-7162 __Ali Ramzan 249 Dunsmuir Drive Lodi CA x95240 _ _. -- - — - - - -- ---- - 95618-4307 Davis CA (Allen - 1 MicbaeLandJSathryn 143'.5F_L MacPr� Drive !Alvarado _ [Jose j 1315 Harney Lane nodi CA �95-242=4500 , Alvarez -110-Q._andSan _ 1533-E. FJarne -Lane._Lodi CA 95242-9585° -- Amador SAntonioandEvelia 1'2062 Henderson -W -ay_- iLodi CA !95242-487~4 'Amaral_ Robert -and Andrea ! 194.6Victoria Drive y Lodi CA 952424768 -- Amick r..-....._..-._...._._..--.... Phil D. — 2526. Banyan nrivP___— Lodi CA !9.5240-7104 nderson------- --__-j _ _ _ A — _ _ Bnan and Venus — 12545 Pinkerton Way Lodi CA 195242_48.03 �Anselmi Charles 19836 Honey Bear Lane _ Stockton CA 95209-1449 _ iAnthony _ i Bruce and Marie 14967 E. Acampo Road Acampo SCA ;95220-92.07 i - Wrcher Carrie X2690 SishopWay _- —_- i Lodi CA 95242-4813 Armstrong Gary _ 1_3020 Cumbria Court .r, !CA 195242 lada 1015 HameyLane —__'Lodi CA 195240-7006'. Allam Mohammad and Kulsoom 12252 Katzakian Way — Lodi _ CA 242 i ------------- iou ---�---�-------�95-4799 Athanas George and Kari 18445 Rodeo Drive Lodi CA 95240-9212 -- ---- - _ —_ -- Badyal -_ Jasbir Singh _ _ 184 E. Harney Lane _ _; Lodi- _ CA -. 195242-9503 Baker A. Fred t P.O. Box 1510 Lodi • CA =95241-1��10Bakken ±Troy and Loris 1001 Harney Lane jLodi A _CA !Barnes !Sandra iliaiviuiperryt,ircie Lodi CA__ 95240-711 ]Harnett IChristonher and Tricia 12310 Olson Drive Lodi _CA 95242-4798 n�aa n� rrPj- a and i ica 2227 Olson Drive Lodi A iCA 95242-4797, Ra,f.Qh Delmar 11� 174 N. Davis Road Lodi CA 95242 Bauer Randall 12439 Rockingham Circle Lodi ICA 95242-4556 Becerra Valentin and Elvira 102 E. Harney Lane Lodi ICA 95242-9503 --- CA _ Beckman — _ Marcia P.O. Box 153 -- Lodi _ 95241-537 Bell Lyndle 814 E. HarneyLane Lodi _ �_ 95242-9534 __ 8@I n 1t Tarrei ana ><eny 145 Wildwa d Dr Lodi CA 95242-4782 — Bertini Tom 1452Wildwood Drive Lodi CA 95242-4779 Bice Walter 2433 Rockingham CircleLodi iLA ySL4L-4,5b Bond Edward IP.O. Box 1747 Lodi CA 95241-1747 Bond _ Jennifer 1215 W. Harney Lane Lodi CA 95242 Braden Ronald and Anne 95 ----------- -- _ 36 E. Harney Lane Lodi CA 95242- _ Bradley — Eric and Anna 1530 Wildwood Drive __!_LLodi SCA 195242-4780 Bradley-------_...� Lucas and_Amantia-._-.___ 12561._LY4 Lary------- -----_ .. Brauer sand Lana _ 1542 Wildwood Drive - - - -- - Brazil Andrew and Christine__ 12234 KatzakianW K __ _ BrogleKUM and Rita___._ _...__.1333 Harney Lane Brooks _„-_ Phyllis _2532 -Crown Place _. ._..__ runmeier JaniceX 6Springhaven-Way 1 Burke I Leo and Lanise 12491 Maggio Circle Busarow , Betty _ 1050 Bradford Circle Button Robert and Ellen -- _._ 2203 Olson Drive _ _ - _-� _ - I Camacho I Eduardo and Leticia 1 P.O Box 690340 i Caraang Amurefina and Marcelmo 12245 Olson Drive Carouba Michael 103 A lewood Cassel Jennifer 1524 Wildwood Drive astelaneAi �{�� Lee luau vv`rnarney pane _I Esteban 712 McCoy Court, #49 Castro _ �Cervelli_.___ ---------- rPauland Wendy____. 11721 Victoria Drive ICharkow !Samuel P.O. Box 637 1 Chesley _ , Stephen and Malay 12072 Bishop Way — Chien [Chia Te 122 W. Harney Lane _jCh(stto herson_ ( Edward and Cassandra '29 N. Allen Drive !Clanton John and Luana 12210KatzakianWa �CIaUS Nancy 910 W. Harney Lane --.._... - ------ ---�—----------- --- — ----- - --- _ _ -- ----- Cockran Conti Costa Costama! Costanza Crabtree Cruz_ Cunha Dabaco Dais Dais _ Damaso Davis — Della Scott Callen and Stacy Antonio and Cynthia_ Alvin and Hilda John — William and Teresa Atabulfo Albert and J. David and Roxanna_ John Sam and Elsie — Mike 1695 Castle Road _- 15_36 Wildwood Drive 13940 Simko Ranch Lane 999 Pearwood Circle _ P.O. Box 131 2557 Pinkerton Way 1037 Vienna Drive 2520 Banyan Drive 1327 Harney Lane 1924 Victoria Drive 585 Springer Lane 585 E. Springer Lane 2549 Ivory Lane 1818 Victoria Drive 2719 Stockton Street _ g Lodi LA -_[95242-4811 ” 'Lodi _._iCA 195242-47MI, 11M !CA - ILodl CA '95.242-4,99 95242-4W- G _ Lodi [! CA _195242=4787 CA Lodi CA 195242-4777' Lodi _ CA 95240-8811 iStockton I Lodi - Lodi Lodi SCA No SCA !CA 95240-7002 jCA '.CA 195242-4797 I 195269-_0340; 195242-4797 95242. _ -I _ — Lodi ICA 195242-47801 Lodi jCA -95242 Lodi Lodi CA '95240-7454^ Thornton Lodi SGA -_95686-0637 CA 19524_2-4813 Lodi Lodi Lodi CA 95242 _ CA95242-2808 t/`'A .- nr )A) 4700 Lodi _ CA 95242 _ Sonoma CA 95476-8625 Lodi _ — CA 95242-4780 Galt CA 95632-9023 Lodi CA 95242-2052 Woodbridge CA 95258 Lodi CA 95242-4803 Lodi CA 95242-9695 Lodi CA 95240-7104 Lodi CA 95242-4500 Lodi CA 95242-4768 Lodi CA 95242 Lodi CA 95242-9224 Lodi _ CA 95242-4811 Lodi CA 95242-4769 Lodi CA 95240-8817 DelongpreJohn and Donna 1548 Wildwood Drive jLodi CA 195242-47801 Deluchiresidence P.O._Box682_Lockeford ICA 95237-0682 - -- - - ----- — - - - - - -- -- - - - - - 682 i -. i r)amatrac Nnrma 1111St Rrarlfnrri rirrla — �1 nr�;li �r _ _�_ ...... .. , ,A 95240 7036 Denniston _ i William and Betty 2251 Olson Drive- _ - Lodi CA 95242-4797 _. __... _ _._ _.-_.._L_ -__-- 1 _ DhallWal T Harinder and K #20Rn0 N- Ray Road j l odi { CA 952_42 Dibble Marcella 11020 Bradford Circle Lodi CA X95240-7002 j - ;Dietrich _ Norene _ 1463 E. Harney Lane Lodi ;CA 95242-9581 j Durston I David and Shelba12049 N. Angier Road Lodi i CA 95240-9479 i -- - --- - - --jS- ---- -- - - Jason- 95242 X224.1 Dyer -_ _ Clinton and Marjorie '2445BockinghamCircle__ _ Lodi ICA 95242-45561 IEbert 'Almeda 12535 Crown Place (Lodi ICA 195242-4787 ----- -------- Ehlers 530 S. Mills Avenue Everitt 1320 E. HarneyLane - ----...--------- - Everitt---,-----. 1CA 195242-9534' y _ I —, .._ - -- -------- - 1002 E. Harney Lane !Lodi � 1 I Nick and Jesslyn 1649 E. Harney Lane Lodi ICA 195242 Robert and Clare 1839 Scarborough Drive Lodi j CA 95240-6121; IFincher P O. Box 352 IClements1CA 95227_-0352 - - } -- - -- -- - - -- --- - - ----- --- -- r- - - - Fink i Carl 540 S. Mills Avenue Lodi �CA 95242 - - I -- ---- - --- --- - - - -- _ ..-- -- - -- - - - - --- -- - -1 ----- - -(Freeman IJonathan and Brooke _2086 Henderson Way Lodi CA 95242-4814 _Freitas William and Esperanza 11021 Harney Lane Lodi CA 195240-70061 t-------- L -- -- Galamay iJlmmy and Cecilia 1428 Cedar Court 'Lodi 'CA 195240-7141 } GalatsatosGeorge - _ 12_316 Olson Drive - I Lodi i CA 95242-4798 Garcia Jon and Linda 2068 Henderson Wa Lodi CA 95242-4814' Garcia _Tomas and Martha_ 1812 Victoria Drive Lodi CA_ 95242-4769 Garrison 1Flora -__ 227 Mulberry Circle Lodi ICA 95240-7_108 Gates _ 540 E. Harney Lane CA 95242-9585 Gaydon William and June — Bernard and Helen CA _ 95240-7114 Clifford and Millie ---------- --- ---- _ Getty Leroy and Alcene 2535 Banyan Drive Lodi-- CA 95240-7170 r - _- -- — Ghannam _ Kalliope _ 2220 Olson Drive Lodi CA 95242-4797 I Giorgi _ __ Kenneth and Elizabeth 3185 Rhododendron Drive __ Florence CR 97439-8990 _ Giuliani Frank and Sheila 1129 Harney Lane Lodi CA 95240-7001 Goff _ _ Dale and Tammy — 880 E. Harney Lane -- Lodi CA 95242-953 - _ Gohl -- Wavne 409 3. Orange Avenue Lodi CA 95240-3824 Gonzalez Roberto and Elva 1930Victoria Drive ®� Lodi CA 95242-4768 _ __--__ IGoonan !Janette and John 1500 W. Harney Lane Lodi ICA 95242 Grady Jr. and Elizabeth f1257 Rivergate Drive !Lodi ICA 95240 ,James Grelle Lresham Jerry and Cathryn 1490 +Mekeel E. Harney Lane 2098 Henderson Way Lodi ±CA Lodi 'CA 95242-9583 95242-4814 Grewal IGurcharan P.O. Box 665 Thornton CA 95686-0665 Griess Griffitts j Grunsky ;Jackson Florence and Ivan 113250 William 12635 and Marisa 12546 N. Extension Road S. Stockton Street Pinkerton Way Lodi Lodi jCA Lodi iCA 195240-8804 -.— 95242 95242-4803 -------- --- -- - Gunselman Michael _ - - X700 McCoy Court, #70 - _ Lodi ;CA 95240-7162 _-------- - -- -- -- - - Gutierrez - - - - --- --- - Lidia -� -_ . -- 233 Mulberry Circle - - - Lodi ; CA - 95240-7108 lHagelie f Berdean and Caroline 501 Springer Lane Lodi ICA- 95242-92241 Halbran Elizabeth X483 Springer Lane Lodi !CA 95242 Hall _ Cliff - Tioga Drive Lodi_ 195242-26511 Hall _J401 Frank 12613 _ W. Harney Lane --;CA Lodi iCA 95242-9570 - -- --- - - -- - Halldorson Halloran (Michael Halsey ------ - - Bruce and Michelle and Elizabeth - - Mark and Christina - ---. - 2228 Katzakian WayLodi '483 Springer Lane _ 1821 Victoria Drive Lodi ___ _ Lodi CA CA CA -1 95242-4799 9524_2-9224 195242-4769 !Hamner Haro ;Gene and Rebecca 1 David and Luc y 12451 Rockingham Circle P O Box 501 Lodi Lodi C SCA 95242-4556 95241-0501, ------------- __ _... _ Harr . __ _._- Bobble _ . _ . _ - Bradford Circle _-__.._. _ _ _- 1 Lodi CA 95240-7040 1..__-._ -. - Hassan ] ..--- Mohammad _ - - I P.O. Box 693153 Stockton CA_ 195269-3153 7Hausauer Hauger - Hauger _j games and Tarah ! William and Sandra_- 12094 Bishop Way _ 12547 Lynch Way !2508 Ham Lane j ) Lodi Lodi Lodi CA 'CA CA 95242-4813 95242-4800 _ Hayn Heine (Kenneth and Cynthia Brian y- — - -- -.._ Debra 810 E. Harney Lane .- _ -- - -- 275 Mulberry Circle I Lodi _ Lodi 'CA CA, F95242-4549 95_24_2-9534 95240-7153 Heinze !Dale and Sheri _ 1528 Springhaven Way _- _ - Lodi CA 95242-4778 Hellwig - 1A. P.O. Box 1872 Stockton CA 95201-1872 Hendricksen Steven and Becky 263 Mulberry Circle Lodi CA 95240-7153 Hensel Doug and Suzanne 2591 Greenfield Lane Lodi CA 95242-4781 Hernandez Nicolas and Maria 299 Mulberry Circle Lodi CA 95240-7112 Hernandez Steven and Michelle 668 Harney Lane Lodi CA 95242-9588 Herrick John and Lisa 2215 Olson Drive Lodi CA 95242-4797 Hickerson and Jackee 1031 Bradford Circle _ Lodi _ CA 95240-7040 _Timothy Hoagland_ - - Marvin and Rizalina 1806 Victoria Drive Lodi CA 95242-4769 Holbert Carol 2463 Rockingham Circle Lodi ICA 95242-4556 -- - - Hollingsworth Gene _--- -__ 1701 S. Mills Avenue —_ - Lodi ICA 195242 �tvl "I*' IN100i ImINIn 01O�C�vir,-gj�iI0) 00 1-! I LD 01'n IM n{ni i� �o'n'.� nid!Opi00'00 n!r•Llnlnjn! .-�.nio --i0il I d; ri! nl iri! �nj I N. 00 0) LD 00 nIn nIn ON,. f d' I rn,min LnIMInI I I tDror,'11,100 0) O 0)10op 00 ItPI I-NIOlN N N N NN'NNIO N O�NNN O1O N N'N N NiNN N N O O N N O N OI NI '.N'N N,NIN N N'N!N1N,N N N'N N 1 NiN'N NININ Ln Ln 1 Ln Ln Ln Ln NINIc, Ln Ln Ln ( Ln I v) NIN N N N Ln 111 Ln 0) In N N I Ln Ln y Ln I Ln m Ln Ln I Ln of rnrn�0);Mrnrnjol�rn,rn,rntrns,rn�rnrn�rn - Ln i Ln j Ln i Ln 0 I Ln I V) I Ln Ln , Ln . rn�rn,rnlrn,rnlo,rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrno)rnrn 0) m 0) I alaia'a a alalaia'alaia,aialalaa'a,aia alalala a a�a ala;ala aialala UjU U a UIQ a U,c�!U:U vi UI U; U,UaU - U UIU!ulu - -- -- U, U,U;c�IU U ;- - c lc� U U;v jU'U,U , — I U a�' ai�i v a) OI OI Oj Oj�I�I a al a -a O OI O� O a1v ai:;-o, O FIJI I,_i,_ Oj O °; aly v(o O Oi O OI O J I 'ai O, - _ aj al O OI O O =al OI I•-� a!�I'a v OI Oi -0, -01 OI - v al of O� OI OI o O cl=al �I OI _ , _ � � �_I �1_J-L�r ;l � rT� I I ili �{I I I '�iiiil II i a,iUl i , m 3 ;gill c• > �, I >I>i = cl I I i Ln 1 xc! T I e) avI 1 OI" M O> 41 O I L =I J Oi� = O-0 > Ja) co L i =>. 01'� _ >IOI� OII > -O O OI'� O ++ O> i I'6 c' O_� "O 0) O 1 T ° > U`rp+ °1 0) a °= =I �Is� O >, O to N C _ ° f0 J U= •L p o a� U� >I i.) oI a) L o; r a, I +r i L! on ° Y m m I on =i uI i++ = iI L of I%i a m1pl O y '� = 3 (v o a 3 IO) = >I0I� Lnj p L 0 o on U== m c L y C m �GIc% N ;F v 3 0J p U' U p TI 3 =a i � 104 3 L -a_ o `- a m IJ10) > 2 �I I j w �f Lu N W r -f i.. m S I� ri L= o o v u c� L > > (7I0 00 LD 0) i o yi2 l0 y T J = m m ° o O O S Lu � U �I�Ic�Ia,S n 00 n � 0 0 on u. O n i C O= 2 O N >, m CO 00 d 0 = O ri ; ri J LnlniN+d•Im M I Ln I N W r-1 I d' I Lit Ln I N I CD I N I Ln N. �_.-•-- �--1' i Ln N , Ln ; O) LniM �tIN 01 N C1' r-1 ri N�r-I I N I LD 00 ! , O MiN Ln Cl' I NILn N ri j d• CD , r•i n-* Ln I N�N M MI(D! ri Lnlm Ln r-, I N I a -i d' 1 0 r -I 100 1 NTLI N m O N� N m nlL.n n m Ln' �-i �-1 N N N �. n d M O d• m M N m .-{ n N M n Olaf Ln I O m to _n_ N lD N m N O Ln N m O al ml j yI N ! I m, ; m LSI 1 T it I mI i Q' TI _! yI =i 141 m, + I 71 I ' N! ! y I I I i L m +_ = ! ViJi N CO I Ni m: I ISI I IaI �I ' ,WI �I I = 1 0)I EI— ++! tnl OI yI { 3I J, OI cr m a tilml ISI =I =I OI I �i �I ml i co '"6, 'a. =I m = mI I = '6 m 1 I pI m m! tlo >�, _ ° IoDiL NI O .I m. N' m•L LI m m{ C y�,� N'+' m ..i > IU i L m IL 'aI _ O m I = m_ O O m! = L Co v= �, m �!a'IOiJ��iDI00 -oI'LI m m U �I _ _ — i ISI , — 1 y O 7. m N I a�I >.� ca m yl�; = L' mI o y c� Tl m m' mI i m O 01I m L •_ =I C = l p O L (v I m L d ��LL m _ L 0) In Lp O O m _ m T , = 0) 41 _ m I[ni�iyl2;UILn m UIDI00 [DIF- I >i I CI I I =1 i INI ' = y mi y! yl { L m M i >i y mi cl yj =I pi O! CO yi y = ° On' an O m�L I I Oi Ti I L ` _;=I 0)� i Y } 0!i y i O y' N r✓I bD, OJ' 0) LIL''OI c �� i hn CIL v L L� j LI Ui I �._ I 0l = O LI• I OI�1 Y �1 m -i 3 m 3 TI m 0) I V Y 'i5 0n, m•.- m = = Li m m m m m m =I 1 OyI U 31 m 01 m a, a� m T v L y _ Y al C I c al [Zi2�21�I 3I °;j m m, mi Y Y YIYI�G>rYdY m � YfYlY1]GiYI]CI]G Y YIJ J J J J J J J J J J I I i I; i Iji II II Leon Rodrigo and' iffany 1815 Victoria Drive Lodi CA 95242-4769 - -. -- - Liepart III Lind 'Anthony Lind !Edith Love (Michael -- - - Lisbet and George ! and Sharon X908 --- -- -- -- - - _--- and Colleen _-------- 907 W. Harney Lane ------ - Interlaken Drive P.O. Box 410 ---- - - 8-00-M ornin Dove Lane g -- -- Lodi �CA_ - Lodi _TCA- Lodi_ - -- Rocklin -- -� ICA -- 95240 --- 95242_9167 95241-0410 95765-5348 Lucas Aaron 712 McCoy Court, #57 Lodi CA 95240-7164 - --d-- - -- - -._y Madewell ! -.--- - - - Randy and Joellen '11422 - Wildwood Drive _ - Lodi SCA 95242-4779 - - IMangrum Mario ags� Martha_ _ -_ _1293 Michael and Pat - - - - - Tameem Octavio Jeanine and Phyllis 1499 Sam and Harriet William and Terry — Daniel and Joyce �- David and Deborah Marian - Mulberry Circle 1490 E. Harney Lane _ - 2524 Winchester Street, #15 2064 Bishop Way 281 Mulberry Circle E. Harney Lane 1455 Springhaven Way 2521 Meadow Drive 220 Mulberry Circle 12240 Katzakian Way 1967 Victoria Drive Lodi ;CA Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi 1_CA CA CA jCA CA IC ICA .CA CA 112 . 195242-975 9 95240-8114 95242-4813 95240-7153 95242-9582' 95242 95240-7131 195240-7154 i 95242-4799 95242-4768 Magana Manassero - __!James �Mardini Iarquez stel Matsumoto Mauch McCune Mehrer Merino Meyer Miller iJoline Anne 2017 Cochran Road 4589 Craig Lane Lodi Vacaville CA ICA 95242 95688-9327 Miller Mims Molles - Moore Moran Mosqueda Michael and Sandra Judy ;lames and Shelley - !Stephanie CI aro!- !Hilario and Rosa 257 Mulberry Circle 2577 Poppy Drive 4006 W. Woodbridge Road 2082 Bishop Way 2524 Winchester Street #6 2239 Olson Drive Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi Lodi -_ _ICA.-__ Lodi CA ---95240-7153 CA CA CA CA 95242-4776 95242-9617 95242-4813 195240-8112 95242-47971 Muhlbeier Tim and Kathy 1468 Springhaven Way-- - Lodi CA 95242-4777 Munson - - Timothy and Christie 2569 Poppy Drive Lodi CA 95242-4776 Musgrove Robert and Patricia 1572 Misty Wood Drive Roseville ICA 95747-7900 Nava Navarro Jaime and Rosalva Margarita 2525 Ham Lane 246 Mulberry Circle Lodi Lodi CA CA 95242-4550 95240-7156 Nguyen Nicolaou Thomas Steven 2552 Pinkerton Way — - 2573 Greenfield Lane Lodi Lodi _ - CA CA 95242-4803 95242-4781 Oden Michael 1518 Wildwood Drive Lodi CA 95242-4780 Ordaz Paiste Paoletti Jesus Manuel and Grego—ria.— !Jeanne 2074 Henderson Way 284 Mulberry Circle P.O. Box 1068 Lodi Lodi 1Woodbridge CA CA CA 95242-4814 95240-7113 95258-1068 --- ------- f Penner -P Pennino !Joseph and Jenny Bryan Jeff and P. 2080 Henderson Way lj,�(�Spnngh en Way 11026 Bradford Circle Lodi-- Lodi Lodi CA CA CA 95242-4814 95242-4777' 95240-70021 _[Plerlegos ersson Petterson Phil and Colline--'--'--- Joann 1469 Wildwood Drive 612 McCoy Court, #62 Lodi Lodi CA CA 95242-4779 95240 1P Phillips Christopher 2238 Olson Drive ___�Lodi 239 Mulberry Circle j2520 S. Ham Lane Lodi Lodi !CA Lodi CA 195242-4797 195240-7108 CA 95242-45491 95240-7167 Pilcher James and Susan le 1 Ron and Jeanefta Pollock Leland T712 McCoy Court, #67 1244 Canyon Creek Drive 2320 Sierra Highlands Drive 2328 Olson Drive _-_------Lodi 1908 Wyndham Way Newman_117&� Lodi CA CA-___ 5360-2728 li 95-2-3-2618 95242-4�98 95242 Quizon Ronald and Dana Ralstin IStella Reagan I Kevin Reed and Cherie Rehman Rendon Anthony and Maria Renner Robert .700 McCoyCourt,-#12 1007 Harney Lane - Lodi I'Lodi CA -_ CA 95240-7162 95240-7006 195240-71081� 245 Mulberry Circle CA_ Reyes Innias and Sandra Reyno Robert and Carolyn Rice Lesley Rico Carlos and Elizabeth Ridenour 446 Cedar Court Lodi -P.O. Box 725 Woodbridge 13480 N. Extension Road Lodi 2056 Henderson Way Lodi 452 Cedar Court CA CA CA CA CA 95240-7143 95258-0725 95242-9249 95242-4814 95240-7143 __jRob�ison [Rieger Earl and Naomi Rivera Patricia Scott 5 E. Harney Lane Lodi 2244 Olson Drive Lodi ------- - C A --195242 95242-9578 4797 2524 Winchester Street, #13 Lodi Rocher� Hans and Raina Rodrigues.- and Gail 125 N. Wellington Way _LLqdt. 12538 Crown Place Lodi _FCA �CA I —1 --t- 195242-30331 ___&ggl�erp .---ILKevin Romero and lima Rostomily Donald and Sandra - ------ 11117 Mark and Elvira 12524 Winchester Street, #14 lodi Harney Lane Lodi Winchester Street, #11 Lodi 1254 Mulberry Circle Lodi Camino Del Escondido ICA A CA CA N_�029-7438 95240-81.14 95240-70011 95240-8113 95240-7156 Samra Akhtar 892 Almarida Drive Campbell ICA 95008-0125 nchez 'FSa Job and Elena _ 909 E. Harney Lane — Lodi CA 95242-9591 nchez Luis and Angela 1634 E. Harney Lane Lodi CA 95242-9588 ndoval- -�_- Sandoval Sandoval Santana Sawyer iJeffery Scholl TJames !Schumacher Jimmie 1451SpringerLane - _ Oscar and Ruth Bradford Circle T9:5:240-7002 Lorenzo and Margarita 1931 E_Harney Lane CA Fernando and Sarah 266 Mulberry CircleJ ___ CA - 434 Cedar Court di iCA 1100 E. Harney Lane ILodi �CA Weldon and Bonnie 1303 Rivergate Drive ;Lodi ;CA - 9522-9224 5242-9591 i 95240-7156 I 95240-7143 95242-95341, 95240-0549 1 Scott F-- - - - --- `SLeaton- Segovia Wayne _ _- - - Bobby and Mary ` - Sergio and Maria 692 E. Harney Lane - - - - - - 10 Mulberry Court 12558 Hoff Lane - Lodi --- Lodi Lodi CA CA CA 95242 -_ 95240-7114; 95242-4815' - _ Seibold Joan a'I'I'IHarney Lane -- _ _Lodi CA 95240_7001 1 Shah Fiaz and Shahnaz1i Kurt and Lisa _ - , Harbhajan _ - Lodi Lodi_ Lodi_ _ 953 Victoria Drive 2551 Pinkerton Way _ 1873 Jamestown Drive _ - CA CA 95242-4768 1 95242-4803 i Sharp Shergill - _ CA 95242-4719 CA 95219 Sidhu Nachhatar and Ruse 15360 Gladstone Drive Stockton Simmons Singh Ronald and Christine 13444 Extension Road Amarjit 12553 Lynch Way ` - Harjit and Jasjit-_` - 2250 Olson Drive Fred and Letha P.O. Box 1441 - and Juanita 1548 Springhaven Way ^ Lodi Lodi _ Lodi Locke_f_ord CA CA 95242-9249 95242-4800 Singh Smith _ SommerDwaine CA CA 'CA_ 95242-4797 95237-1441 95242-4778 Lodi _ Sousa - Stanley Nicole 2524 Winchester Street, #10 Steven and Jan 2221 Olson Drive Lodi Lodi CA 95240-8113 CA 95242-4797 tarkovich Steinkarnp !Aaron and 2214 Olson Drive H her Lee _ __2524 Winchester Street, #3 ------ _ John _ 2209 Olson Drive Larry and Goreti 893 E. Harney Lane _ Matthew and Elaine _ 1073 Bradford Circle _ _ Alex and Rosalie 2456 Rockingham Circle - Lodi - ICA_____195242-4797 CA _ 95240-8112 --, -- -- Stewart _ Stice_ Swope - - Taddei Lodi Lodi _ Lodi- Lodi - CA _ CA 95242-4797 95242-9590 _ CA CA 95240-7040 95242-4555 Tamura Tamura Joey 788 W. Armstrong Road Satoru and Ethel 1220 E. Harney Lane Lodi Lodi CA CA 95242-9544 95242-9534 Tanabe Joyce ' 1040 W. Kettleman Lane, Ste. 113 Lodi CA -6 56 _ _ -_- Erim and Annette 2092 Henderson Way Lodi CA Thompson Tolentino Scott and Dorothy ___-__- 1044 Bradford Circle Maria 4 -J2514 Banyan Drive Lodi Lodi CA CA 95240-7002 95240-7104 'Troutman - ---- --- — - Tran _!Long and Lien Gary and Diane HendersonWa 1722 Victoria Drive _- _ E. Armstrong Road g— — Lodi ------I Lodi- Lodi --- --� CA CA CA ------ 95242-4814 95242-4792 95240-9425 Tsutsumi ------� Ga and Diane ' Gary — ---aa� Tuitavuki Uriz Valente Robert and Michelle _ LFaustino and Maria Thomas Loretta -9-60 172j Olson Drive 3725iarney Lane 1. Harney Lane Lodi (CA Lodi _ (CA_ Lodi ---TCA 95242-4798 95242-9577 95242-9534 and ---- Van Alen _�_-- _-__--- Theodore and Karen _-----___—._ _._ 2555 Ivory Lane Lodi ------- CA --- 95242-4811 ---- IVan Van Lear Ruiten Sonja 12468 Robert Rockingham Circle P.O. Box 548 -- -. Lodi Woodbridge CA •95242-4555 CA + 95258-0548 --...- - --- - - --- -- - ---- --- --- Vannortwick Vargas - Vargem ----- - --- - Aaron and Lisa Margarita - -- - - Keith and Sandra 11470 -- -- 1959 Victoria Drive 2532 Banyan Drive - _ Wildwood Drive Lodi 'Lodi ICA Lodi CA_- 195242-4768 195240`71041 CA 195242-47791 _ -. -- - Varner - -- (Sean and Summer --- _ X2601 S. Stockton Street --- _ - . Lodi _ - - - _CA 95240-8804' Velasco IArnulfo Vernon John and Julie 12585 272 Mulberry Circle Greenfield Lane Lodi ICA Lodi SCA 195240-7156 j95242-4781 Villanueva jElissa ;1212 Bradford Circle Lodi ICA 95240-7036. - -_ Villanueva Vipond ---- Gerardo and Brandee Jeffrey and Anna - - 2540 Potomac W 2573 Canal Drive - - --- ------ Lodi Lodi ICA -. CA 95242-4770 95242-4818 -- ---- -- - - ------------, - ---------- -- .._ -- - _ --.-. _.. Viramontes -.._--------..- Vocker lAbelardo -------- - - - Robert and Carolyn 1425 Springer Lane - ------ 1525 Wildwood Drive Lodi -- ---I-- Lodi ICA ICA - 95242-9224 95242-4780 - - --.---------- ---- --- ------ Voikert Waldo - -- ----- Nicholas -- -- _- -- -- P.O. Box 2625 700 McCoy Court, #61 ---- Corvallis Lodi IOR CA 97339-2901 95240-7162 -- --- Walsh --- Kimberly_w- - - - - 2546 Hoff Lane - ----- Lodi CA 95242-4815 -- _-- - -_._-- Walz WeasnerWendy liames and Shirley110 Hemlock Drive 700 McCoy Court, #60 Lodi ICA iCA 95240-6737 95240-7162 -- - _ - ,Lodi Weisz Wells Christian Larry and Doris 2552 Hoff Lane 427 E. Harney Lane Lodi Lodi CA jCA 95242-4815 95242-9579 I Wellwood_ Lance and Stacey_ 10295 Red Cedar Court San Diego CA 92131 _ _ Wernette_ Francis and B. 1032 Bradford Circle Lodi CA 95240-7002 - - Wichman - _— Bernell and S. 11038 Bradford Circle,Lo' di CA 95240-7002 Wild Mark and Kathleen 11807 Victoria Drive Lodi CA 95242-4769 Williams Charles and Jennifer 8669 Bay Colony Drive Indianapolis In 46234-2912 Williams Williams Chester and Robin Janice 1714 Timberlake Circle 1009 Bradford CircleLodi - - Lodi CA CA 95242-4283 95240-7040 _ _ Williams Raylene - 260 Mulberry Circle 692 E. Harney Lane Lodi Lodi CA CA 95240-7156 95242-9588 Williams Glenn and Barbara Winters Traci 2514 Ham Lane Lodi CA 952424549 U/icannr SZnR Tahama rlriva I I nri• Ir'A IQ1;?47 --------- Wombaugt, Dennis and Auguste — - _ _ 1025 Bradford Circle Lodi CA 95240-7040 1 -- - - -- l Weng Janice ---._ 515 Swallow Lane Lodi -- -- I CA 95240-6388 _ Wong iSteve Wing Sing and Della 2226 Olson Drive Lodi �CA 95242-4797 .... _.. .....—._.___.—_...-- -- Wright i-_ __ Gregory and Karer_ P.O. Box 1377 __ - —CA Lockeford CA 95237-1377 Yarbrough Michael and Melia 1536 �prirlOhaven Way —,rLodi_--__-.--I� _._- 95242-4778 ___ — Yost Dennis 817 Wightman Drive - Lodi c1s�A�-a7at •. Iv,.....,. IOAi � A Dorri,.i� JD56 Sradfnrd Circle Lodi ; CA 952407on2 Young Garvin and Stephanie Zarate Isaac and Donna 11824 Victoria Drive 2036 Bishop Street ' Lodi Stockton -CA 95242-4769 95205-3442 (African American Chamber of Commerce ;Amour Paulette 16333 Pacific Avenue, #537 Stockton _ICA ICA 95207 _ I ,American Medical Response Dispatch— _ i 14701 Stoddard Road Modesto ICA 9.5356 12t1as_PrsaP.ertie ,-lnc.-----------•----Barkett Edward -- - - 2800 W. March Lane, Ste. 250 Stockton ---------- -- 95219-8218 ------•--- Baumbach & Piazza, Inc. Elson Josh 323 W. Elm Street Lodi —�CA 195240 I Baumbach & Piazza, Inc. PechinStel ven Bennett Development— Bennett Dennis 323 W. Elm Street P.O. Box 1597 Lodi Lodi ICA 95240 - _ ICA_ 95_ --_ _ _ _ _ — Bennett Development'' evelopmentMoore Steve _ P.O. Box 1597 Lodi — —_ CAS41 --- _ — — _ _ _— — — BIA of the Delta Beckman John Builders Exchange _ _ _ Self —_— Mike Business Council, Inc. AddingtonRon _ 315 N. Joaquin Street, Ste. 7500 West Lane 2800 W. March Lane, #473 2 Stockton _ Stockton Stockton _ CA CA _ CA 95202 95210 _ 95219 i _ _ ^! Huber Hon. Myson CA State Assembly 218 W. Pine Street Lodi _—~ CA 95240 _— CA State Senate Berryhill Hon. Tom_ _ 1308 W. Main Street, Ste. C Ripon CA 95366 —_ _— CA Valley Miwok Tribe — Burley Silvia _ _ 1163 E. March Lane, Ste. D Stockton CA 95210 — California Equity Mgmt Grp Inc Property Manager _ _ _ _— P.O. Box 1747 — Modesto CA 95353-1747 Central Valley Assoc. of Realtors Cofer _- Cliff _ 16980 S. Harlan Road —' Lathrop _i CA 95330 _ _ Cherokee Memorial Park Irwin Charles 13823 N. Backman Road Lodi _ CA 95240 of Lod_ i Property Manager 221 W. Pine Street Lodi CA 95240 — _City Cluff, LLC Hanson Richard — ----' 908 W. Turner Road Lodi CA 95242 - - -- Conti 9, Associates. Inc. ,Antonio P.O. Box 1396 nn r. W rlh 'rl as r'A _ 952SR �ry Jlaiaw_na�anri�en rh�p,war �� Ine.,�c_ .. , .,�.a.. -......., 4........ Daisy Enterprises Property Manager 1178W Ariamc�- I P.O. Box 1259 1 Stockton CA 95204 — Woodbridge CA 95258-1259 i _-- 1Dillon & Murphy Engineering (Dillon mil P.O. Box 2180 Lodi — CA 95241-2180 _ _ DRS Real Estate Appraisals Sasaki Darrell 1806 W. Kettleman Lane, Ste. 1 Lodi CA 95242 —_—_ F&L Costa Family LP Costa Felix _ J.3J&ON. West Lane Lodi CA 95242 — i=tZ1 r'ncta Family ! P Costa Greg _-----..- CF_&L Costa Family LP Costa -Armstrong Jane _ � 13_160 N. West Lane — Lodi - 13160 N. West Lane I Lad _ rA 95240 CA95242 '._..__� 9nlnnTrini4vDer4ww Cta AO)Ol Ctnrktnn QR91Q-----I ; FCB Homes IFF LP Jimison ]Jim Fink Carl and Judith 10100 Trinity Parkway, Ste. 420 540 S. MillsAvenue Stockton - 1 Lodi CA A 95219 - -, 95242-3428 - _ L FrankAlbertj Ranch LP _ G and J Burns LLC fGew_eke Properties _ _ _ _ Meyer - Farros Jolene John 114026 N. Davis Road P.O. Box 1504 P.O. Box 1210 _- -_ Lodi ' Woodbridge Lodi CA ;CA9521 CA 95242 58 1 _ _ Glenbrough Homes - _ Property Manager P.O. Box 14y~ �t -_._ Lodi -^SCA - Stockton - CA L95240 7-9507' Greenlaw Grupe Operating Co Ptp --- PropertyA4anager IHarris & Associates ' Henderson School _ Roberts Dosty, Principal Steve 135 Allen 113451 Richie _ -- E. 10th Street, Ste. A N Extension Road 2291 W. March Lane Tracy Lodi _ _ Stockton CA CA _ 95242 95207 _ Herum Crabtree Attorneys Aranda _ _ Herum/Crabtree Attorneys Herum Steve 2291 W. March Lane, Ste. 8100 — Stockton �CA` 95207 — - - _ Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Martinez +Mark 306 E. Main Street, #303 Stockton CA 95202 1 - Judith Buethe Communications _ Judith Buethe Communications K and W Development LLC _ T _ ; Kackys LLC - Buethe _ Stanley Meyers -_ Judith _ _ Jan - Property Manager 1816 Guy 1872 P.O. Box 773 445 W. Weber Avenue, Ste. 221 W. Lodi Avenue Westwind Drive Stockton Stockton 1CA Lodi Lodi --- CA LCA �CA 95201 95203 1 95240-3302, 95242 - ----- --- -- - --- --- - CKackys LLC - ---- Mikilas -------- -- Kathy r-- 872 Westwind Drive Lodi �CA 95242 -- _-- - - Katzakian, Williams, Sherman !KB Home North Bay, Inc. - Flemmer �_ Lowell (Property Manager 1777 S. Ham Lane, Ste. A 2420 Del Paso Road Lodi Sacramento CA CA --.. 95242 95834 �K eldsen Sinnock & Neudeck ! Lee & Associates _i Lodi Chamber of Commerce - Sinnock Davis - Patrick Steve Tom Pat P.O. Box 844 241 Frank West Circle, Ste. 300Stoi 35 S. School Street Stockton _ ckton Lodi CA CA CA 95201-0844 95242 95240 1Lodi City Clerk V Randi ! 221 W. Pine Street Lodi CA 95240 John -f Lodi City Council - - - _ Lodi City Council Hansen _.__..- _____.__. Katzakian Hon. Larry - `- - Hon. Phil 221 W. Pine Street - +- -- 1221 W. Pine Street i Lodi Lodi ;CA -- CA 95240 95240 - - - - - --- Lodi City Council ---- - - -- - Mnunce 1 -- - - - Hon. JoAnne--,].-221W— -- -- - - - Pine Street -Lodi CA 95240 ii Lodi City Council --_-_- ----- - Lodi City PIO _ - Nakanishi _ Hood n. Alan _`_-- Jeff 221 W. Pine Street -_ -- _Lodi 1221 W. Pine Street Lodi - CA 95240_- 95240 odi Electric I ' ' --------��----------____ Lodi Fire Dept. (Morrow George 1331 S. Ham Lane Lodi ._ _1 Lodi CA - r3 A 95242 - 95240 Pretz ----------- Mike 217 W. Pine Street Lodi Mayor LodiPolice Dept. Johnson Main Hon. Bob David Wally 221 W. Pine Street 215 W. Elm Street, Ste. 240 _ 221 W. Pine Street Lodi Lodi - Lodi A EA-25240-- -CA CA -_-Lodi 9524_0 95242 _ _ I - L6gi orks-` _ Sandelin '- _-_ __ Property Manager 1305 E. Vine Street - Lodi _ _ CA _ 95240 Lodi Unified Schnal Dist _ mal School Dist.Hand Art 2575 W. Turner Road -------- Lodi Lodi _ - CA CA - 95240 95242 Lodi-�QLandbridgeGraoe Commiss _ `. C___--_ ` —__ [MarkThomas and Company, Inc._ Doty lKen 7300 Folsom Blvd., Ste. 203 Isacramento CA 95826 Mark Thomas and Company, Inc HamesRob 17300 Folsom Blvd.. Ste. 203 Sacramento iCA 195826_ McCoy North LLC ....._._.__.._ ............. Property Manager James Way, #150 Pismo Beach jCA 193449-28771 -, -! MCR En ineering - -- ------ ---. ;Miller Farms ,--_ - Holtberg - _ Miller --------- _!310 Randy i2000 _ ........--- --t Craig --------- 0 Street, Ste. 100 Sacramento SCA 195814 --- -- 349 E. Harney t Lane _ Lodi _ CA 95240-6839 194557-0097 I Mohr Enterprises Ltd Pt Villa F Jer P.O. Box 97 Hayward CA 12525 Montessori School Tarditi !Terry Stockton Street Lodi CSA {{ JvIVTrarispnrtation, Inc. TKuvkendall --- -_ _-..---- -}---------------1-' I Brenda X24 ---------.._..----------` S. Sacramento Street Lodi ----- -- - -- - ----- ---- �,-_ ff Phillp�En9inee_ rink ----- ( R Thomas Development, Inc. ��ua Thomas .-.-- t�1at��CW i-;e-J Ron ..� _ �•___. �.._ -,,,.. �-'�� 95696 IVICIU1011L.JUCCL,.JLC. �a�a„�� P.O. Box 1598 Lodi CA 95241-1598 & Associates, Inc. N. Pershing Avenue, Ste. D Stockton 95207-6750 Ruiz ISam 14600 S.J. Audubon Society i •7�S.J. Council for the American Indian S.J. Farm Bureau Federation __.. ------ --- -- _ _ Valente - — ----- --- 1P.O. Joe - - Box 7755 StOCKton CA j95Lb/ P.O. Box 1552 Manteca CA 95336 _ P.O. Box 8444 Stockton CA 95208 - -- -'CA--95201------- ---------- !S.J. RTD DeMartino Dont... P.O. Box 201010 Stockton CA 95201 ;San Joaquin Partnership - - - Locke Michael 12800 W. March Lane, #473 Stockton SCA 95219 - -- !Siegfried & Associates I Carrales ILex 13244 Brookside Road, Ste. 100 Stockton _ _JCA_�95219 Sierra Club P.O. Box 9258 Stockton CA 95208 _ SJ Co Public Works -_ WSJ _ Levers Jeffrey _ _ P.O. Box 1800 Stockton CA95201 Joaquin Street, #627 Stockton CA 195202 Co. Board__o_ f Sup_ ervisors - - !SJ Co. CAO -- _Vogel Lopez Hon. Ken- ----_ Manuel 44 N. San -- : 44 N. San Joaquin Street, #640 Stockton CA 95202 1a?5 CA WSJ Co. Communitv Development N, Fl nnr;idn Street Stockton 95202 i.SJ Co. OES f----- - ---- -- 1SJ Co. PIO ;SJ Co._Public Works Baldwin -- - -- McConnell Gau ;Ron ; ------ --- - - -- Karen Tom 2101 E. Earhart Avenue, Ste. 300 -- ----- 44 N. San Joaquin Street P.O. Box 1800 Stockton Stockton Stockton_ CA CA CA 95206 --- 95202 95201 _ _ WSJ Co. Public Works SJ Co. Sheriff_ _ Selling i Moore Mike -_ Hon. Steve_ _ P.O. Box 1800 --Stockton 7000 Michael N. Canlis Blvd_. _ _ 'French Camp CA 95201 CA 95231 _ WSJ Co. Sheriffs Dept_ -_ —_ !SJ Co. Sheriffs Dept. _ __ Desmarais_ Wright Lt. Tom--- -^ Sgt. Todd--__ 7000 Michael Canlis Blvd. - 7000 Michael Canlis Blvd. French Camp French Camp CA - CA 95231 95231 - (SJCOG SJCOG — _- - Chesley — _ Dial !Andy Steve 555 W. Weber Avenue_ Stockton 95202 555 W. Weber Avenue Stockton CA 95202 Atherstone Nathan P.O. Box 201010 Stockton CA 195201 1SJRTD 1SJRT6 IDeMartin-o Donna IP.O. Box 201010 5TOCKton %H_ {I_'d Sorour Partners �_ _ --�- JProperty Manager 4 �134z Kivergate unve ---- coag ------ �H _.j7��+�� 1 J Stokes Farms �G �1.ncniicnr \/nacPe RcnrocontativP �Warmardam Teichert Construction � --Ii-Prnnarry Old nnanacar I Denise ' v Troy � 7500 Kile Road 44 N. San Joaquin StreetIrA 265 Val Dervin Parkway I Lodi Stockton CA - 95242 CA 95206 — Drive Stockton CA 95219-3403 The Vineyard/Oaks at Lodi LLC Property Manager 3525 W. Benjamin Holt [Tokay Development, Inc. U.S.- Co-ngress --- !Union Pacific Railroad Company iValley Iron Works Inc V -a I'le -y- - I r -on - W -o -r-k-s,-, —In c --------- Kirst -IJeffrc McNerney 1, !Coubal ey P.O. Box 1259 i�n.jerg 2222 Grand Canal Blvd., #7 Property Manager 1416 Dodge Street, #830 Owner 2205 Roaring Camp Drive Joe 127 E. Harney Lane Wo �d6riidje CA 95258 -952071---.... 68179-00011 95670-7619 95240 Stockton Omaha Gold River Lodi CA NE CA CA W L Investors Winchester Woods LLC Wine & Roses ------ --- 'D ucette �1- 0 tiviunson — ------- Tom 10100 Trinity Pkwy, Ste. 420 Property Manager P.O. Box 1070 Russ 2505 W. Turner Road Stockton Woodbridge Lodi CA CA CA 95219-7 41 95258-1070 95242 Moodbridge Irrig Dist P�;pert� Manager Property Manager 118777 Lower Sacramento Road Woodbridge CA 95258-91221